


ina 


4 
tral 
tA ge 


Py 


se 
Race est 


Se Hes 
anne estar Pete ahs See aT eg, 


Seo ee 


Sess be < = e Pek = ess - =e a : 7 y a i 


Sones 





1 
iat ens : ee Se encore a ce series 








carpet meres 














, 
i. » 


ae 
ANS, lai, , ie nh 
cee 
a 


6 


— 


ee ee S 
= = 


fe ee ee 


~ 


‘ vA 
eat att if 
‘ i i ¢ 

iy ihe \ 





BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 
TEACHER IN ISRAEL 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2022 with funding from 
Princeton Theological Seminary Library 


https://archive.org/details/bernhardfelsenthOOfels 


We 4 








ES SIA Poy 


AUT PRIN 
OCT 20 1924 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL.,.» 
TEACHER IN ISRAEL 






a 


SELECTIONS FROM HIS WRITINGS 
WITH BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH AND BIBLIOGRAPHY 
BY HIS DAUGHTER 


EMMA FELSENTHAL 


FOREWORD BY CYRUS ADLER 


NEW YORK 
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 


AMERICAN BRANCH: 35 WEST 32np STREET 
LONDON, TORONTO, MELROURNE AND BOMBAY 


CopryriGcutT 1924 
By Emma FELSENTHAL 


PRINTED IN Tue Unrrep Srarus or AMERICA 
Tosy Rupsovits Inc. 





FOREWORD 


It is a high privilege to be permitted to write a foreword 
to a volume devoted to the life and writings of Bernhard 
Felsenthal. ‘This privilege I ascribe in part to the fact that 
his daughter, the editor of the present volume, has placed 
an unduly high value upon the slight encouragement and 
help given her in its preparation. I confess that I was not 
sanguine of her success when she first broached the project 
to me, for as a rule the son or the daughter is an unsuccessful 
biographer. In this case we have the rare exception to the 
almost universal rule. The beautiful and noble figure of 
Bernhard Felsenthal is made to live before our very eyes. 
We can see his lovely personality re-created for those who 
had the good fortune to know him, and his very form and 
figure made evident to a new generation who will be blessed 
through the acquaintance of such a man. 

I prefer to believe, however, that Miss Felsenthal—even 
if subconsciously—accorded me this opportunity because of 
a special personal relationship which I was permitted to have 
with her father. 

When I was a lad of sixteen, I rashly undertook to prepare 
a catalogue of the library of Isaac Leeser, and zealous 
friends caused the catalogue, the first of its kind in this 
country, to be published. It naturally contained many 
errors and those Doctor Felsenthal took the trouble to point 
out in detail, but with words of great kindness and en- 
couragement. Four years later I published another cata- 
logue—of the library of Doctor Joshua I. Cohen of 
Baltimore—and to this Doctor Felsenthal gave generous 
praise in a review. 


V1 FOREWORD 


At about the same time, I began to contribute a series 
of articles on American Jewish history to the Menorah 
and it was he who suggested to me the formation of the 
American Jewish Historical Society. At that time I should 
not have had the temerity to undertake its organization 
without his encouragement and the feeling that a man of 
his years and standing was prepared to further the enterprise. 

I had the pleasure too of taking part, as chairman of the 
Board of Directors of the Jewish Theological Seminary of 
America, in conferring the degree of Doctor of Divinity upon 
Doctor Felsenthal in 1905. Since so many of those concerned 
have now passed away, it may not be amiss to reveal the 
fact that this action was suggested by Judge Sulzberger to 
Doctor Schechter. The latter eagerly took up the sugges- 
tion and wrote and telegraphed to all of the directors so 
that he might early be able to apprise Doctor Felsenthal 
of the proposed distinction. With the restraint customary 
upon such occasions Doctor Schechter on June 18, 1905, 
conferred upon Doctor Felsenthal the Honorary Degree of 
Doctor of Divinity “as a mark of recognition of his attain- 
ments, his zeal and his devotion to the cause of American 
Judaism.” 

For those who are accustomed to weigh words, this was 
indeed a deserved tribute. Nothing need be added to it— 


nothing is to be taken away. 
Cyrus ADLER 


PREFATORY NOTE 


Many have shown kindness to me in the preparation of 
this book. Iam very grateful to those who have generously 
given of their time and knowledge, and have assisted me with 
information, suggestion, or encouragement. I think first 
of Dr. Gotthard Deutsch, now also departed from among us, 
who, only a short time after my father’s death, gave the first 
impetus to the making of one portion of this volume when 
he expressed the hope that a selection from my father’s 
writings should some day be gathered together and published. 
Dr. Deutsch knew of the plans for this book, saw the bibli- 
ography in unfinished form, and encouraged me to continue. 
Dr. Cyrus Adler, Dr. Samuel Schulman, and Dr. H. G. 
Enelow have all given me friendly encouragement and 
advice; Dr. Samuel S. Cohon has aided me in the translitera- 
tion of Hebrew words and in other matters involving a 
knowledge of Hebrew; Dr. Alexander Marx, librarian of 
the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, and Mr. A. S. 
Freidus, the late librarian of the Jewish Division of the New 
York Public Library, have given helpful suggestions in 
regard to the bibliography and have extended to me many 
courtesies in the two libraries administered by them. From 
Mr. Freidus I received invaluable aid in summarizing the 
Hebrew articles which the bibliography contains. Mr. I. 
George Dobsevage, secretary of the Jewish Publication 
Society of America, and others of its officers have shown me 
kindness. From Miss Anabel E. Hartman, formerly of the 
faculty of the University of Illinois, I have received most 
cordial assistance, and a number of others to whom I have 
appealed for information or aid have responded freely and 


vii 


Vill PREFATORY NOTE 


generously. I gratefully acknowledge the service they have 
rendered me. | 

It is not possible adequately to express my deep sense of 
obligation toward Mr. Toby Rubovits, who has given abso- 
lutely without stint of his time and thought and effort in 
order that this book should appear in worthy form. He has 
taken upon himself the burden of a thousand details con- 
nected with its publication, and has done this solely out of 
devotion to the memory of the teacher whom he loved and 
reverenced in life. No words of mine could do more than 
reflect faintly the heartfelt gratitude I feel toward this most 
loyal, most generous friend. 


EmMMA FELSENTHAL 
URBANA, ILLINOIS 


January, 1924 


It seems well to state here that I have made a few changes 
in the language of my father’s English papers. I have wished 
to remove the more obvious Germanisms which they contain. 
My alterations have been few and slight and have been 
limited for the most part to changes here and there in the 
order of words, to occasional substitutions of one preposition 
for another, etc. JI am confident that the sense has not been 
in the least affected by this small amount of editing which 


I have done. 
aed fh 


CONTENTS 


HORE WORDIBY, CYRUS TADLER UR ITUh: | kM eV OR Paya tdie Saunt! Fe V 


REE ATOR VoNOTE i Ucn cee ae ren ei has @ REO Oe re We ENT 


PART I. BERNHARD FELSENTHAL, TEACHER 


IN ISRAEL 

PRN SRUATELE ROG e Ue Ar aye Gumi saa Wie Mi Gide ithe a RON Aas 2 
len OUTHEINN GERMANY. 7 1522-TO04 Sify elie, vey cel neh 0S 7 

III. Frrst YEARS IN AMERICA. LEADERSHIP IN REFORM 
Ebel OOAM MLAB TT cite COU LLU INEM RMT Me RAL CN or ig cor La 20 
IV. SCA BDIPATE/ LONG TOOA TOO fe he Mer enaun SW retire pate siar 30 
Weegee TIREMENT MEnLOo7 LO 7 lm dire Mee wir ehaline Nae ulin) GO 
NA ACTIVITYOFOR ZIONISMS 2. TSO 71008 1), vile! | end Wine") uy 
ESAS TANCE AR GT OO Zon QOs iy) oun) Say tanec uawl Se hitce Aer a AMM Loe 


APPENDIX: GERMAN ORIGINALS OF LETTERS INCLUDED IN TEXT 102 


PART II. SELECTED WRITINGS 


PRAVVEELE PORES WHR EJOICE saad bi cliley Mle hi aicnaulys RE OF 
2. THE ORIGIN OF JUDAISM AND Its THREE EpocHSs . . . 139 
Pe B EB ISDA TRICK mmr rau Att. cei Tetmuediaa Volo RWeeh teh Ts TOA’ 
4. BIBLE INTERPRETATION: How AND How Not... . 177 
5. CONCERNING JESUS, SURNAMED “THE CHRIst”. . . . 188 
DaRUUPAVVANDERINGS JEW UU db hee Miran yn. ie eee TOS 
Pen EVISU RESTS gin citi e acca Mnt aman Marsares), ve citi cane neam on hfe. 
SV EER ET OSWE: OTAND 0.) jal ee emmite rai) dct mei main 22 8 


ix 


x CONTENTS 


9. SELECTED PASSAGES: 
On Judaism 
On Reform Judaism 
On the Synod Question 
On Zionism . 
On Christianity, the Relation of Te atid the eee to 
the World, etc. 
On Ethics and Religion, Philosophy K Life, ELCe 


PART IIL ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 
BIBLIOGRAPHY . 


INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY. 


PAGE 


241 
250 
254 
256 


265 
270 


283 


355 


PART I 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 
TEACHER IN ISRAEL 





uf 5° 


Bea oi ho) 


vt Ai VA 


i err 


*% 


vi 
a 
Pend 
: “on - 
¢ gee 
r\ } Ly } 
' ' 4 
Pt he 
ae & 
P ay, 
“Ay . \ 
v ¥ 
. 
| 
4 
\ 
' 
1 
' 
’ 
? 
{ 
¢ 
\e 
3 * & 
Lite 
f nae 
1 
fl 
f 
. 
fi 
é 
’ 
Ras, 
‘ 
4 
- ‘ 
ane is 
{ Z Ms 
im Pe c 
ghey r p 
{ih +e Al 
: oO ive Ad 
ae i > 
LS Most Vat b hs | 
ee A) Le eo 
bel hin 


} i 


a Stig rei 





1 vv ‘ ik 7 


git 
MY FATHER 


ON the fourth of March, 1903, my father sat in his study 
on the third floor of our house on Prairie Avenue, Chicago, 
writing a letter. This study, or “‘library,” as we called it, 
was a large, plain room, having as its main furnishings a 
capacious desk and three bookcases, two of which were 
simply sets of shelves, carpenter-made and home-stained, 
which my father had used in library after library for thirty 
years, in various moves from one house to another. 

The books on these shelves were also old and plain. They 
were nearly all in Hebrew or German, and with very few 
exceptions they had to do with Hebrew literature, Jewish 
history, Jewish problems. The tall folios of the Talmud 
leaned against each other on the lowest shelves. It was 
the library of a Hebrew scholar who had had little money 
for books and had had to satisfy himself with owning 
the absolute indispensables in his subject, and very few 
others. 

In 1903 this privation troubled him no longer. It was one 
he had long since grown accustomed to and indeed had 
always taken philosophically, as he had taken all the events 
and circumstances of his life. In the very letter he was at 
that moment writing he refers to the ‘‘spiritual calm,” the 
“objective attitude of mind” which he has always endeav- 
ored to cultivate in relation to the facts of life. 

This letter holds up the mirror perfectly to his inward 
self, shows us clearly what was his state of mind and heart 
and soul at eighty-one. It shall therefore be given in full in 


3 


4 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


these pages. First, however, let me tell how he appeared 
to the outward physical eye. 

There is double reason to describe him at this late period 
of his life, only five years before its end: one remembers him 
best then, as is natural; and he was then most character- 
istically himself. Some men, the very active, are always 
young, as they come to our minds; my father’s qualities were 
those which attach themselves rather to vigorous old age. 

He looked ten years less than eighty. There was not a 
trace of feebleness in his walk, in his voice, in his posture, 
which was erect as the average man’s. His head was large 
and well shaped, his hair very thick and very gray—not 
even yet entirely white. His features were large but not 
heavy; the forehead noticeably full and broad and high. 
The eyes were very dark brown and deep set and glowing—as 
with a soft fire, partly of the mind, partly of the spirit— 
under straight, thick eyebrows almost black. ‘There were 
deep lines about the eyes, otherwise the skin was unusually 
smooth for one of his years. A short beard covered his 
chin. Only an inch or two more than average height, he 
gave the effect of being taller than he was, because of his 
slenderness of build. 

He gave little thought to his appearance, yet was not 
neglectful of it. No doubt he looked a little old-fashioned 
to others—not in his soft house coat, but on the street, with 
the high silk hat he continued to wear (a little large for him 
and so worn too far back on his head) long after other men 
had adopted other fashions, and in his long ministerial- 
looking black coat and narrow tie. 

His expression was serious, mild, thoughtful, kindly. 
In conversation his face shone with a sweet friendliness. 
He could look amused, pleased, very happy—and also 
sad, troubled, or angry; being quite unconscious of self, his 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 5 


expression reflected frankly the feeling of the moment. 
Just as perfectly it reflected his settled permanent self. 

He was not of “‘magnetic” or “stimulating” or ‘‘com- 
manding”’ personality; these words do not fit one so modest 
and retiring. For all that, the impression he made was 
immediate. One recognized instinctively that he was wise 
and good and lovable—such a man as could write the letter 
which I now set down. 

March 4, 1903 
Miss Bertha Levi 
Frankfort on the Main 


Dear Nigce! Several weeks have already passed since I received 
your last letter, dated December, and still—I regretfully acknowl- 
edge—it remains unanswered. Let me hope, dear Bertha, that you 
will be so considerate as to pardon me, and will find excuse enough 
in the fact that I am no longer one of those happy carefree young 
people who cheerfully seize their pens in order to exchange thoughts 
with dear friends far away. Now do not contradict me, dear Bertha,— 
do not tell me I need only a 1 and an 8 to write the number of my years. 
Well, in that you are correct. But—but—the figure 8 belongs at the 
left, and the figure 1 at the right; not the other way round. Do not 
forget that 81 years lie behind me, and not 18, and that a man in his 
eighties is inclined to be more or less inactive, neglectful, to dislike 
the labor of writing, and so on, and soon. One cannot resist the laws 
of nature, neither those which govern our mental life, nor those which 
govern our physical life; we are obliged, every one of us, to resign 
ourselves submissively to their rule. 

“Uncle is low-spirited; is harboring pessimistic thoughts; he 
must surely be writing on a cloudy day,’’—perhaps this is what you 
will think after reading so far. But it is not so. I am not giving 
vent to philosophical reflections, neither optimistic nor pessimistic 
reflections; I am merely stating facts. 

But facts also have their two sides. I have always been accus- 
tomed to face the facts of life with spiritual calm, and in an objective 
attitude of mind; I have always endeavored to look upon life’s events 
without prejudice, from both their cheerful and their gloomy sides. 
Now let me add, lest you conclude from what I say that old age is 


6 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


weighing heavily upon me, that I have good reason to point to the 
bright side of the picture, and that, considering my years, I am well 
and happy, not yet bowed down by weariness and weakness and lan- 
guor and other ills of old age. For this thanks to my Creator! 

Old age is not the time of hope, but of memory. To me these 
years seem like the evening hour which follows a long and crowded 
day, in which rain and sunshine, storm and calm, clouds and blue 
sky have succeeded each other. We sit before our door and thought- 
fully watch the sun as it slowly sinks in the sky. In spirit we live 
over again the fast-fading day. Many pictures pass before the 
inward eye and many are the thoughts which rise, one after another, 
in our minds. Well for us if the sight of the setting sun does not 
disturb the serenity of our souls, and if we can look back with a quiet 
conscience upon the day that is past; if we can say that the happy 
hours have outnumbered those that were sad, and if we can with 
peaceful and contented mind face the rapidly approaching night in 
which the sun will no longer shine for us. 

As I write these last words, a stanza comes to my mind from my 
best-beloved poet, Goethe, who expresses immeasurably better than 
I am able to do it the thoughts which at this moment fill my soul. 

“Ueber allen Gipfeln—ist Ruh’—in allen Wipfeln—spiirest Du— 
kaum einen Hauch.—Die Vogelein schweigen im Walde.—Warte nur, 
balde—ruhest Du auch.” 

But enough of this! I am serene and confident; physically, too, 
quite well and strong. .. . 

How is it with you, dear Bertha? It will ever give me extraor- 
dinary happiness to know that you at all times are joyful of heart, 
are passing through life pure and serene in spirit, and that the good 
God, Ruler of our destinies, has also bestowed upon you health and 
well-being in rich measure. 

Farewell for today! A thousand affectionate greetings from your 
far-away uncle, who yet in thought is so very near to you. 


B. FELSENTHAL 


In spirit we return to the fields of memory. “Many 
pictures pass before the inward eye.”’ 


II 


YOUTH IN GERMANY 
1822-1854 


My father spent his childhood in the village of Miinch- 
weiler in the Rhenish Palatinate in the province of Bavaria. 
His father had a small shop, and also, like the other villagers, 
a small farm or vineyard, where, however, no agricultural 
knowledge seems to have been acquired by any of the family, 
and it may be assumed that the three sons occupied them- 
selves in other ways than in work on the farm. There was 
one sister, and my father was the oldest of the four. 

The first of my father’s ancestors of whom he had any 
knowledge (I tell of them chiefly because of his own great 
interest in family relationships) was a certain Isaac, who 
lived in the beginning of the eighteenth century in the small 
town of Idar, some fifty miles west of the Rhine and about 
the same distance south of Coblenz. ‘This Isaac had a son 
Jacob, born in 1732, who established himself in the near-by 
village of Rathskirchen, not far from Miinchweiler, and it 
was his name (Jacob Rathskirchen, that is, Jacob of Raths- 
kirchen) we heard mentioned most often in conversations 
about the family between my father and one whom we called 
Uncle Henry, though he was several degrees more distantly 
related to us than that—my father’s devoted friend, Henry 
Greenebaum. ‘These two knew the facts about the rather 
large number of descendants of Isaac of Idar better than any- 
one else, and Uncle Henry also felt that strong interest in 
ties of blood which was common a generation or two ago, 
and especially so under the conditions in which the Jews 


Vi 


8 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


of Europe lived. Uncle Henry made much, in his genial way, 
of every “connection,” and my father, though less expansive, 
was always glad to meet his cousins any degree removed, and 
knew exactly where they belonged on the family tree. Noth- 
ing could be more consistent. Everyone knows, who has 
read two paragraphs of his writings, what deep attachment 
he felt toward those whom he thought of as a larger family, 
the whole people of Israel. Many times he defends our 
deeper interest in those nearest to us, saying that it springs 
from a simple and eternal law of man’s nature—which does 
not prevent him from loving humanity, but which makes 
him love more than others his own people, his own friends, 
his own brothers. 

In this spirit he writes in 1878 to Mr. August Blum, 
whose mother was my father’s cousin: 

So far as I am concerned, it is not only the bond of friendship 
toward an earnest striving young man, and the bond of respect for 
an admirable character, that draw me to you—it is the bond of blood 
relationship also. It is now nearly twenty-four years since I left 
Germany and settled in America; yet I am still such a confirmed 
German “old fogy”’ that I continue to lay stress on mishpochah.t 
Your departed mother, whose lovely image will not fade from my mind 
so long as memory lives, was from my earliest childhood so intimate 
and dear a friend that for her sake too I feel myself peculiarly drawn 
toward her son. 


It is not surprising, then, that my father enjoyed talk with 
Uncle Henry about “ Jacob Rathskirchen,” enjoyed meeting 
relatives, whether close or distant, and even wrote out a 
brief genealogy. 

He calls this simply, ‘‘Some Notes for the History of Our 
Family.” It was written in 1891 for a nephew who had 
asked for information as to his forebears, and begins, in 
imitation of the old Jewish fashion of the days when Jews 

t Family. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL fe) 


were without family names, “To my dear nephew Adolph 
bent David ben Simon ben Isaac ben Jacob ben Isaac 
Felsenthal.’’ And indeed for the oldest two in the series of 
grandfathers the name Felsenthal could not be rightly used, 
for it was only during the lifetime of my father’s grandfather, 
in 1807, that the surname was adopted. In that year an 
edict was issued by Emperor Napoleon which required that 
all Jews in France adopt regular family names, and the 
Rhenish Palatinate, where the family resided, was then a 
part of the French empire. 

The only other fact of interest which my father tells in 
these notes is that one of the family, his grandfather’s 
brother, ‘‘was a member of the great ‘Sanhedrin,’ con- 
vened by Napoleon in 1806, which assembled in Paris in 
that and the following year.” Aside from this distinction 
there is probably no fact (or there was none known to my 
father) that might further embellish a family history. The 
Felsenthals back through the several generations of which 
we have any knowledge appear to have been respected typical 
German Jews, having their full quota of leading citizens, but 
for the most part without special claim to notice outside a 
limited circle. 

Of the intimate side of his childhood my father told us 
almost nothing; nor were others of his family given to 
recounting reminiscences from that time. One brief auto- 
biographical fragment remains in the notes he made for an 
address delivered when a man of sixty before a boys’ club 
in Chicago. From this it appears he was a quite normal boy, 
playing, running, shouting. Yet I cannot imagine his giv- 
ing himself up to play with quite the abandon of the other 
boys of his age. I am sure at least that from the first day 
he knew what printed letters meant he preferred to read. 


1Son of. 


IO BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


His school was, of course, the separate one maintained 
by the Jews of the village. One may venture the guess that 
outside of school hours he mingled in a friendly way with 
those who were not Jewish, as was possible in Germany at 
that time. For it was not from any hard experience of 
discrimination against him personally, or of persecution 
personally suffered, that he felt all his life long the bitterness 
of anti-Semitism. 


At thirteen he was sent to the “‘ Kreisgewerbschule”’ in 
Kaiserslautern, where he followed a general course for three 
years, and from which he went on to the Polytechnic High 
School in Munich. This school was doubtless more ad- 
vanced than its name would indicate to American readers 
and corresponded in a general way to one of our colleges. 
A university, in the European sense, my father never 
attended, strange as it may seem, when one remembers the 
respect in which his scholarship was held in later years, the 
Hebrew grammar he wrote, the Ph.D. he received honoris 
causa little more than a dozen years after coming to this 
country. It is not so strange. There are other roads to 
scholarship for some men than through schools and uni- 
versities. During all the years of his youth the study of 
books and meditation upon them—for he laid stress on the 
significance of facts, not on their accumulation—were his life. 
There were no personal cares to distract him; his family, 
though not what one might call prosperous, did not need his 
material help; they respected learning and were proud of 
their studious son and brother: he was entirely free to live 
the life of the student. 

No one is left to tell us of those days and nights in Kaisers- 
lautern, in Munich, when he was scarcely ever seen without 
a book. I vaguely remember, from my childhood, one of 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL II 


his generation, a distant cousin living in Chicago, who had 
known him as a young man in Germany, speaking of his 
quiet ways and of his studiousness. But one does not need 
the testimony of those who saw him. He read, read, read, 
so much is certain; and was tempted by no time-wasting 
pleasures of any kind. Yet he never lost himself so com- 
pletely in the world of books that he forgot the world about 
him. ‘‘Dear cousin Felsenthal,’? wrote someone many, 
many years later, “‘your personality is bound up with the 
most precious recollections of my childhood. Somehow I 
connect you with the story of the marriage of the mouse and 
the nut shell, and with other stories too, though it could not 
have been you from whom I heard them.”’ 

His Jewish education was begun at an early age in 
Miinchweiler, and was continued under the instruction of 
Rabbi Moses Cohen in Kaiserslautern, but the impression 
among us is that in this field also he studied, for the most 
part, alone. The great fact is that in these years of his youth 
he became master in some way of a great store of Jewish 
learning. It was not in order to become a rabbi that he 
devoted himself to the study of Jewish literature, of Hebrew, 
and of kindred subjects. It was his expectation, until he 
was eighteen, to enter the government civil service, and to 
this end he “‘specialized,”’ while in the high school at Munich, 
in mathematics, a subject which he loved. For a civil serv- 
ice career, what value had Talmudic lore? But at that 
time, as my father wrote many years later,' referring to the 
boyhood of a friend who likewise had studied Torah for the 
love of it, “‘at that time these studies were pursued for 
their own sake, without regard to a profession to which they 
might lead. The study of the Torah was not looked upon as 
‘a spade with which to dig, nor a crown with which to adorn 

Cf. Liebmann Adler. Eine Gedenkrede. Bibliog. 240. 


12 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


one’s self.’ No practical considerations were attached 
thereto, and one studied for higher, more ideal reasons.”’ 
It is certain that my father, at a very early age, became 
passionately devoted to special Jewish studies, and solely 
for love of them he went on and on—from Hebrew to 
Semitic languages in general; from Jewish history and 
Jewish thought to their background in and relations with 
the religious history and religious philosophy of the world. 

He must indeed have been well prepared when, recogniz- 
ing finally how impossible it was for a Jew to advance him- 
self in the service of the state, he changed his plans, entered 
the teachers’ seminary at Kaiserslautern about the year 
1840, and two years later became a village teacher. 

But though the study of Judaism became early his 
special interest—not Jewish religion alone, but Judaism in 
the wide sense in which he used the word, “the sum total of 
all the manifestations of the Jewish spirit’—this was by 
no means to the neglect of other subjects. Mathematics 
interested him, as I have said, and history, and philosophy, 
and literature, in particular German literature. 

There must have been epoch-making hours at this period 
of his life when he sat with his book by lamp or candle. In 
one of these he first made the acquaintance of Lessing, his 
revered Lessing; in one he first read Faust—enormous 
event! These two, Goethe and Lessing, were for him espe- 
cially beloved names. He quotes from them often and often 
in his own writings, and there would be no question, even if 
we had not his direct statement, that they exercised a 
profound influence upon his spiritual life. Toward Lessing 
he felt special gratitude for his immense service to the cause 
of religious tolerance. Goethe he read for all the reasons 
that one reads Goethe; he read and re-read him all his life 
long, and when in his middle years and his old age he had 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL aT? 


not in his hand a work of Jewish literature, his book was 
almost sure to be Faust. } 

If one may judge from the high respect in which he always 
held the work of elementary teaching, and from the words 
he wrote when a man of sixty, my father felt his own school 
life to have been vital in its influence upon him. ‘‘The 
impressions which one carries from the schoolroom are deep 
and lasting,’ is what he says. ‘‘Whoever casts an intro- 
spective glance into his spiritual being, whoever seeks to 
discover the inner springs of his own conduct, whoever 
recognizes clearly what it is that has made him such as he 
is and no other, what it is that makes him behave in such 
and such a way and not otherwise, will acknowledge that the 
school as well as life has helped to form him.’ 


A friend from the Munich days was Moritz Mayer, a 
brilliant young student of law at the University, who later, 
in this country, in the fifties and sixties, shared in the ideas 
held by my father and others as to the exact direction of 
Jewish Reform, and worked for the cause of Reform as a 
rabbi in the South. It is a pleasant picture of Moritz 
Mayer that my father once drew, and one which casts a 
reflex light upon himself. ‘‘I well remember how his eyes 
were beaming, and how his whole face was radiant when he 
spoke of and quoted from his favorite poets, the Latin 
classics, Horace, Martial, and others.’’ One likes to think 
of these two, Bernhard Felsenthal and Moritz Mayer, walk- 
ing together to near-by villages (places so many “hours” 
away was the expression they used), or visiting each other 
in their rooms, sharing with beaming eyes their literary 
enthusiasms. 


t A number of the quotations from B.F. which appear in this sketch have been 
translated from the German. It has not been thought necessary to indicate in 
every case the language of the original. 


14 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


There must have been other friends of this time whose 
names we do not know; for though my father’s world was 
first of all the world of thought, it was never wholly this, and 
one may be sure that he felt in youth as in age a genuine 
interest in the people about him. He lived, as the saying 
goes, within himself, but himself was never the subject of 
his thinking. His relations with others must always, there- 
fore, have been frank and natural, and others looked up to 
him with great respect and with affection. 

“Tt probably was so,” “‘It must have been so,’’—too 
many times I am obliged to use these expressions. We know 
so little of his early life because it never occurred to him to 
talk about himself. He did not live in the past, not, at 
least, in its little everyday affairs; yet there is no doubt 
that they were clear in memory. He spoke a few times of 
long walks he took to other villages, and he must have been 
physically strong, though not of noticeably robust type. 
Once I asked him whether he had known so-and-so in Ger- 
many. ‘Yes, indeed,’ he answered, and went on to relate 
in an amused way an incident showing how extremely simple 
over there in his youth the household arrangements were of 
a friend who had grown very rich and lived luxuriously in 
America. | 

And once he described, in a published article on the hymn 
“Lekhah Dodi,” the hymn of welcome to the Sabbath, the 
Friday evening service in the synagogue, as it used to be, 
writing in such a way that one cannot doubt it was his own 
experience he was relating: 


O I think with joy of the Friday evening service when I went with 
dear father to the synagogue, and when [ heard our ’Hazzan sing with 
his sonorous voice and in a melodious tone the popular hymn. “Boz 
Khallah! Boi Khallah! Come, thou bride! Come, thou bride!” The 
whole congregation was enraptured. Another spirit came over them 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 15 


and remained with them throughout the whole Sabbath. It was as 
though a Neshamah Yetherah, an ‘‘Oversoul,” had come from on high 
and had lent to their lives a more sublime character, more holiness, 
more beatitude, and true bliss. The everyday thoughts disappeared 
as by magic when the Sabbath’s coming was greeted by song and 
psalm; a Sabbath spirit, a spirit of freedom from earthly cares and of 
enjoyment in God took possession of the congregation. 


Of the twelve years from 1842 to 1854, in which my 
father was a teacher of Jewish children, there is almost noth- 
ing that may with certainty be said. From his description 
(before the Peerless Society) of the school he himself 
attended, we may suppose that he taught not only Hebrew 
language and literature, Jewish religion, history, and cus- 
toms, but mathematics and geography also, and German, 
and history in general. One is glad to think that the course 
in my father’s school included secular as well as religious 
subjects. For he rejoiced profoundly that there had been a 
Mendelssohn in the previous century who had induced the 
German Jewish people to leave their ‘spiritual ghetto” and 
become acquainted with the wider culture of the world; 
and in teaching German literature in addition to Hebrew, 
Roman history as well as Jewish, his feeling as to what was 
best for his people was exactly represented. In either case 
it is unthinkable that he did not, in his special Jewish teach- 
ing, draw constant comparison with the facts of general his- 
tory, and with modern views in science and morals, as was 
his later habit in writing on Jewish subjects, and did not 
attempt to give his pupils that true sense of relations and of 
values which his own wide reading had brought to him. 

It was during the forties that the Russian government 
took steps to organize a system of schools for Jews. My 
father had some thought of going to Russia to teach in these 
schools, but the plan failed, and he remained in Germany. 


ae - BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


I think he must have been very happy in his teaching. 
He had had his special preparation at a teachers’ seminary, 
and realized the importance of this. ‘‘To be a teacher in 
the full sense of the word,’ he wrote, “‘one must be 
acquainted with psychology [die Seelenkunde], with the study 
of method, with pedagogy.”’ It was never routine work for 
him; he never for a moment lost sight of its ideal side. I 
remember when, at the public celebration of his eightieth 
birthday, he came forward to respond to the kind speeches in 
which over and over again his far-reaching services had been 
referred to—it had been difficult for him to sit high up before 
the eyes of the large congregation and be eulogized—he 
spoke, not of his larger work, but of the personal contact 
he had had with the children and young people in the Sab- 
bath school. He found in this, he said, one of the great 
gratifications of his life. It could not have been different 
when in the forties, as a young man, he taught there in a 
German village. 

There was no doubt another great source of satisfaction 
for him during these quiet years in the opportunity which 
his life of teaching gave him of continuing his own studies. 
Kaiserslautern was only ten miles distant from Miinchweiler; 
perhaps he made an occasional journey there to examine a 
book, or to discuss a mooted Talmudic question with Rabbi 
Cohen or some other Jewish scholar. Certainly he spent 
his leisure, every hour of it which was not filled by one 
friendly duty or another, with his books. How else would 
he have been able to cite later with such sureness chapter 
and verse, not only of one Book, but of many books of 
literature, of religion, of language, of history ? 

Stirring events occurred in Germany during this decade 
in both the political and the Jewish religious world. There 
is no contemporary statement of my father’s attitude toward 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 17 


these events. Long after he refers in some place to “the 
glorious year of the people’s uprising in 1848”’; but one would 
not need to be told in so many words that my father, lover 
of freedom, desired intensely that the struggle with kings 
which then took place should end in the victory of the people. 
Nor does one need other proof than his own views on Jew- 
ish Reform, clearly expressed ten, fifteen years later in Amer- 
ica, to be certain that, as he read at Miinchweiler what had 
been said and resolved and laid down by Geiger and Hold- 
heim and Adler and others at the rabbinical conferences at 
Brunswick and Frankfort and Breslau, in 1844, and ’45, and 
’46, his soul rejoiced over every sign they gave of progress 
toward liberalism in Jewish thought and Jewish life. He felt 
that it was a Jewish renascence into which he was born. 
“Die geistigen Str6mungen, welche seit einem Vierteljahr- 
hundert das Judenthum durchziehen, haben ein Leben unter 
den Glaubensbriidern wach gerufen, wie ein solches seit 
den letzten fiinfhundert Jahren nicht mehr bestanden hat”’ 
(“The movement which during this last quarter-century has 
passed through Judaism has called into being a more vigor- 
ous religious life among its adherents than has existed for 
five hundred years’’) are words he wrote some twenty years 
later, by which time, in a new country, he had taken no 
insignificant part in keeping this new life in Judaism at its 
fullest. Who knows? Perhaps the secret desire to share in 
such a work was aroused in my father in his Miinchweiler days 
by these epoch-making rabbinical conferences of the forties. 


The years passed, and in 1854, with his father and sister, 
he came to this country. -The two brothers had preceded 
them; the mother had died at home in the little German 
village two years before. The reason for the family removal 
was the same which dictated the step to thousands of other 


18 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


German Jews in the early fifties, and, for that matter, to 
thousands of other Germans. ‘They knew that on this side 
of the ocean they would breathe a freer air, could expect for 
themselves and their children opportunities which, the 
revolution of 1848 being without result, would never be open 
to them in the land of their birth. In the case of Jews the 
situation, as has been suggested, was especially difficult, 
because certain avenues of development, certain professions, 
were entirely closed to them, or definite limits were set to 
the degree of advancement allowed to Jews within them. 
My father had considered entering the government service 
in some other capacity than that of village teacher. But 
he knew that, had he done so, Germany would have said to 
him, “‘So far shalt thou go, and no farther,’ and he would 
have been forced, solely because he was a Jew, to remain in 
an obscure position. 

There remain from that journey from Bavaria to Central 
United States a few pages of penciled notes in a little cloth- 
covered notebook. The family sailed from a French port, 
and passing through France on their way to the vessel, they 
must have had some slight contact with the French peasant, 
for we find in the little book an observation on his superiority 
to the German Bauer—the Frenchman agreeable, cordial, 
possessing a native grace of manner, the German boorish 
by contrast. A passing observation this, and in regard to 
one group only. It must not be taken to represent his 
attitude toward Germans and Germany in general. ‘There 
are hundreds of sentences in his later writings, his letters and 
articles, which show his devotion to Germany, the Germany 
of his youth, with its Gemiithlichkeit, its spirit of simple 
friendliness, its noble literature. How deep the influence 
of his early years was, how truly he remained a German in 
some respects to the end of his days (and, it may be said in 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 19 


passing, what were the limits of his devotion to things 
German), is best indicated in his words, written in rgor, in 
an essay dealing in part with the Jews considered as a race:? 


Racially I am a Jew, for I have been born among the Jewish 
nation. Politically I am an American, as patriotic, as enthusiastic, 
as devoted an American citizen as it is possible to be. Spiritually I 
am a German, for my inner life has been profoundly influenced by 
Schiller, by Goethe, by Kant, and by other intellectual giants of 
Germany. I have drunk from the springs of German literature; I 
have sat at the feet of German teachers; and I acknowledge with a 
certain pride, in thought and feeling | am a German. 


Thus he acknowledges his relation to the spiritual Ger- 
many of his youth. What his feeling was toward political 
Germany may be inferred from his love for its opposite, 
free America: “I am as patriotic, as enthusiastic, as devoted 
an American citizen as it is possible to be.” 

But there is a passage from an informal piece of writing 
dated New Year’s Eve, January 1, 1888, which shows still 
more clearly his attitude toward the two nations considered 
in their governmental aspects: 


In Germany Bismarck reigns and the old Kaiser says Yes and 
Amen to all that Bismarck commands. More soldiers? Very well; 
the army must be increased. More taxes? Certainly. ‘The father- 
land needs mightier armies, more forts, larger fleets; must be prepared 
to meet its hereditary enemies to the East and to the West, the 
Muscovites and the Gauls. And if in the meantime the spirit of 
free development within the country lowers its torch and every thought 
and every effort in the direction of nobler things is discouraged, so 
that material aims may reach fulfillment, what of that ? 

The Britons? That nation of shopkeepers, as people are so fond 
of calling them? As for me, I praise these Britons and their American 
cousins in spite of everything. ‘They are the upholders and preservers 
of true freedom—not that freedom which is fashioned from above, 
which comes as a gift from those in power, but that more genuine 
freedom which springs from individual self-determination and is 
limited by respect for the freedom and the rights of others. 


t Jiidische Thesen. Bibliog. 297. 


III 


FIRST YEARS IN AMERICA. LEADERSHIP 
IN REFORM 1854-1864 


ON arrival in this country (my father carrying a bag of 
prunes which someone in Miinchweiler had asked him to 
deliver to a relative in New York), the three traveled west 
to Louisville, where one of the brothers had established him- 
self. My father after a few months went on to Lawrence- 
burg, Indiana, in which place he remained for a year as 
teacher in a Jewish family, leaving early in 1856 for the neigh- 
boring town of Madison where a situation had offered itself. 

Madison was a town of 8,000, having, as it happened, a 
rather vigorous Jewish life. There was a congregation of 
fifteen families, with a resident rabbi, and the usual congrega- 
tional school, where secular as well as religious branches were 
taught and much more of religious education was attempted 
than in our Sunday schools of today. My father went to 
Madison as teacher in this school. Here he stayed for two 
years, toward the end of that time performing some of the 
functions of rabbi, though it is clear that he did not then 
nor for some years after think of himself as a rabbi or even 
as one looking forward to a rabbinical career. 

The congregation was of course Orthodox. Before 1860 
there were in the entire country hardly more than a half 
dozen congregations which had accepted the principles of 
Reform and were acting upon them in their synagogal life. 
It created no small excitement in the Jewish community of 
Madison, therefore, when my father made a speeech in 
monthly meeting—it was a Sunday afternoon, the first of 


20 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 21 


February, 1857; then and there began his practical efforts in 
the cause of Jewish Reform in America—in which he sug- 
gested that radical changes be made in the Sabbath service. 

His proposals are conservative enough to many of us 
now in the reading, but they sounded bold indeed in the ears 
of some of his listeners. ‘‘What!”’ exclaimed X, when my 
father had ceased speaking, ‘‘a man with such notions expects 
to read prayers for us on Rosh ha-Shanah? Such a person 
wants to teach our children Judaism 2” My father quotes 
the remark (also other more approving ones) in an article 
describing the lively meeting which ran through several 
numbers of the Deborah in March of that year.t| His own 
speech is there given in full. It is informal and refers mainly 
to the local situation; nevertheless, it clearly foreshadows the 
- two important statements of Reform principles which came 
from his pen during the two following years. The spirit of 
the Madison speech and its fundamental ideas are identical 
with those of Kol Kore Bamidbar. 

He began to write for the Jewish press when he contrib- 
uted, from Lawrenceburg, and then from Madison, two 
or three articles to Dr. Wise’s Israelite. From Madison he 
contributed also his first article to the magazine Sina1, a 
monthly devoted to the discussion of Reform principles 
which was edited by Dr. David Einhorn, of Baltimore. Dr. 
Einhorn was one of the outstanding figures in American 
Judaism at this period, a man of splendid intellect and force 
of character. My father had the strongest admiration for 
him as a leader and as a man; said of him that he was “‘ein 
prophetischer Geist”; and the close friendship which began 
with Einhorn at this time was one of the great satisfactions 
of my father’s life for the next twenty years. They met 
only a very few times—in 1860 and again in 1869—but they 


«“‘Reformbewegungen in den israelitischen Gemeinden Amerika’s.”” Bibliog. 8. 


22 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


exchanged many, many letters and discussed in a confi- 
dential way problems and persons in Judaism, particularly 
in American Judaism, and practical and personal matters 
also. In later years (Einhorn died in 1879) their views 
diverged somewhat, my father’s radicalism (radicalism for 
that time, let it be understood) being a shade more con- 
servative than that of Einhorn. But in the fifties and 
sixties and early seventies they were in complete (or almost 
complete) intellectual harmony. Einhorn and Samuel 
Adler—these were the two among that early group of 
leaders whom my father most admired and with whom he 
had the closest personal relations, the two whom he char- 
acterized (in 1891, after the death of Adler) as “the Luther 
and the Melanchthon of the Jewish Reform movement.” 

Correspondence with Adler, also frequent, began in 
January, 1859, when my father was in Chicago, in connec- 
tion with an extremely important event of which something 
will be said in these pages. Adler’s first letter begins, 
‘“Geehrtester Herr College! Stossen Sie sich nicht an dieser 
Ueberschrift. Ein Mann, der denkt und schreibt und wirkt 
wie Sie, der ist unser College, wenn er auch keine Besoldung 
dafiir empfingt” (‘‘My dear colleague! You must not 
wonder at being thus addressed. A man who thinks and 
writes and works as you do is our colleague, even though he 
receives no salary therefor’), and he signs himself, ‘‘mit 
briiderlichem Gruss, Ihr S. Adler.’”? And my father, in 
turn, looked up to Adler as one of Israel’s wisest men, and 
loved him for his mildness as well as for his wisdom. 

Life in Madison, while not without its compensations, 
chiefly in the form of pleasant friendships, had its difficult 
side. In the fall of 1857 my father wrote to his friend 
Moritz Mayer in Charleston that he had not the leisure nor 
the peace of mind to contribute other articles to Sinai, as he 





TEACHER IN ISRAEL 23 


should like to do. “Es gibt selten eine Stunde, wo man 
ruhig genug ist, um einen natiirlichen Gedanken nieder- 
zuschreiben.”’ And there are other indications that he 
was beginning to think it would be well to seek a position 
elsewhere. Dr. Mayer wrote to him shortly thereafter of a 
position in Mobile, where there would be a real opportunity 
to influence an Orthodox congregation into becoming one of 
Reform character (only he should by no means mention in 
his letter of application that he hoped to work such a trans- 
formation). He did not apply for the Mobile position; he 
was strongly anti-slavery in his opinions, and this may have 
had something to do with his decision. However, his stay 
in Madison lasted only a few months longer, and in April, 
1858, urged by friends in Chicago, in particular by Mr. 
Gerhard Foreman, whom he had known well in Germany, 
he came to the city, then a town of 80,000, where he was to 
remain to the end of his days. 

In Chicago his first employment had nothing to do with 
his special abilities and preparation. He became a bank 
clerk and sat (very likely) for so many hours a day before 
a thick book on a high stool. It amuses one a little to think 
of him in such a capacity, knowing how limited his knowl- 
edge always was of finance and of business in general; but 
his routine tasks were probably not seriously distasteful to 
him, since they had to do with figures, and the occupation 
was, for that reason, not a poor alternative for teaching. 
It left him perfectly free, also, to live his own life when away 
from his desk. And his employers, Greenebaum Brothers, 
who were at the same time his countrymen, his kinsmen, and 
his very good friends, recognized that in his case the avoca- 
tion was far more important than the vocation, and assisted 
him to combine the two the more easily by fitting up for 
him a small room behind the office as a study. Here he had 


24 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


his books, and here he read and thought and wrote during 
his leisure hours. No doubt it was here in this little back 
room at 45 Clark Street that his Kol Kore Bamidbar, that 
one of his writings which was to stir the minds so profoundly 
and affect so directly the religious future of many of his 
fellow-Jews, was planned and took shape. 


There were, in 1858, two Jewish congregations in Chicago, 
both of them Orthodox. They conducted their services 
entirely in Hebrew (which was sufficiently understood by 
very few) according to a ritual based in part on outworn 
ideas, retained the traditional ceremonies, and stood for 
the strictest adherence in the private religious life of their 
members to the usages and customs of the past. The 613 
Biblical injunctions were to be literally obeyed, and the 
Talmud was to be the authority on their interpretation. 
The Aaronides—those who were believed to be of priestly 
origin—retained their special privileges. Certain primitive 
marriage regulations remained in force. The Bible was held 
to be directly inspired. One prayed for the coming of a 
personal Messiah, the restoration of the Palestinian mon- 
archy with a descendant of the house of David as ruler, the 
restoration of the sacrificial cult—repeating prayers many 
centuries old without, perhaps, very close attention to their 
content. or, to quote my father’s opinion, there were the 
Gewohnheitsmenschen (‘creatures of habit’’), and there were 
the sincerely orthodox; and the Gewohnheitsmenschen were 
holding in a superstitious and unthinking way to custom while 
giving no thought to the great fundamental religious principles 
of Judaism; were giving expression in their prayers to beliefs 
and ideas which in their secret hearts they had abandoned. 

Such were the prevailing opinions and sentiments among 
the Jews of Chicago at this time, such the religious atmos- 





TEACHER IN ISRAEL 25 


phere. Sentiment and opinion were, however, by no means 
unanimous. A few of the members of Kehillath Anshe 
Maarabh, influenced by the modern spirit, and by what 
the Reform movement had accomplished elsewhere, desired 
earnestly that the congregation should adapt itself to West- 
ern and nineteenth-century ideas, and after much debate 
some changes were introduced into the ritual. But no one 
was satisfied—neither those who had been persuaded against 
their will to alter a few of their religious habits, nor those 
who had proposed that the changes be made. What these 
young men wished was reform of a much more decided and 
thoroughgoing character. Though they worked more or 
less blindly, they realized that a few external reforms were 
unimportant when underlying ideas remained unaffected. 

My father came to Chicago in April, 1858, and imme- 
diately this small group gathered about him, and two months 
later, in the office of Greenebaum Brothers, organized them- 
selves into the Jiidischer Reformverein (Jewish Reform 
Society), with the ultimate object of establishing a separate 
congregation and the immediate one of winning over others 
to their way of thinking. My father was elected secretary, 
and under his leadership the society began to discuss the 
definite principles of Reform. 

The twenty-seven theses’ which my father submitted at 
the first meeting and which were debated at this and subse- 
quent meetings were adopted by the society practically 
without change. This paper, written in a form which was 
a favorite one with him—he loved to set down his thoughts 
thus succinctly, in clear, orderly, systematic fashion—was 
the first complete statement he made of his Reform opinions. 
In it are to be found, either directly expressed or implied, 
his views on many of the subjects on which he wrote often 


1 Cf. The Beginnings of the Chicago Sinai Congregation. Bibliog. 277. 


26 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


and forcibly in later years—the religious freedom of the 
individual, the synod, Jewish dogma, the racial unity of the 
Jews, and others; and it is of great interest to observe that, 
with the one exception of ‘‘the mission of Israel,’”’ in regard 
to which his thinking underwent a notable modification,” of 
which I shall speak later, he held the same views consist- 
ently from then to the end of his life. 

These theses were followed in 1859 by the forty-page 
pamphlet, Kol Kore Bamidbar (‘A Voice Calling in the 
Wilderness’’), in which my father, speaking to a wider public, 
the Jewish community in general, gave fuller expression of his 
views in language persuasive and eloquent. Inspired by the 
vision of a clarified and enlightened Judaism, which here in 
America had its special opportunity, he pleaded for a regen- 
eration of the religious life; for adaptation of the ceremonies 
to modern and Western conditions; for the willing recognition 
of the opportunity which the dispersion had brought to 
Israel for the spread of its sublime ideas. “Here,” he said, 
“let Judaism blossom forth in such wise that ‘our wisdom 
and our understanding will appear before the eyes of the 
nations.’” (“Hier muss ein Judenthum emporbliihen das 
‘unsere Weisheit und unsere Vernunft vor den Augen der 
Nationen’ ist.’’) , 

Regarding reform of the ceremonial life, his views, briefly 
stated, were these: Judaism was a religion of development 
and had therefore the right to alter its forms and institutions. 
Ceremonies had no special sacredness in themselves; they 
might be of exceeding value in fortifying and elevating the 
religious and moral nature, but if through changed conditions 
they lost their power, it was better to cast them aside. ‘‘A 
religious law which is not rooted either in the spiritual or the 
physical nature of man is binding only so long as it continues 
to exert a sanctifying influence on head and heart, on char- 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 2 


acter and conduct.” Ceremonies which were clearly anti- 
quated should then be discarded, and as to the Mosaic laws, 
history had rendered many of them obsolete forever. But 
let all care be taken to preserve those ceremonies and usages 
which still retained their religious significance—the Sabbath 
evening customs in the home, the Seder service, the lighting 
of the Hanukkah candles. ‘Man soll nicht das Kind mit dem 
Bade ausschiitten.”’ There was very great danger in reform 
which took no account of the past. Reform did not indeed 
consist in destroying, it was a building up, a regeneration of 
the religious life. ‘“‘Immerhin bleibt das Aufbauen die 
Hauptsache.” In what was this regeneration to consist ? 
In renewed devotion to the great principles of faith in God 
and morality in human relations, in intenser loyalty to 
Judaism, to Judaism enlightened and clarified. 

Kol Kore Bamidbar, as has already been suggested, 
exerted a marked influence in Chicago. In addition, the 
Reformverein as a society made various attempts to influ- 
ence those outside its membership. ‘Two large public meet- 
ings were held, at both of which my father spoke; a ‘‘call”’ 
to the friends of Jewish Reform in Chicago to unite to estab- 
lish a congregation was issued; letters were sent to Dr. 
Samuel Adler, asking advice on the course it would be wise 
for a young Reform congregation to pursue, and these letters 
(written by my father, but signed by an official committee), 
as also Dr. Adler’s replies, were published in Sinai. It was 
at this time that Dr. Adler wrote to my father (still a bank 
clerk, it will be remembered), calling him “‘ Geehrtester Herr 
Gollece:;: 

The society grew slowly, and though its purpose was 
finally accomplished, in 1861, it was only after a period of 
struggle and effort greater than my father lets appear in 
the historical sketch which he wrote some forty years later, 


28 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


“The Beginnings of Chicago Sinai Congregation.” In a 
letter to a friend in Lawrenceburg, Mr. L. Adler, he analyzed 
the situation at the time in this way: 


Our efforts at reform are making headway very slowly. You will 
not wonder at that when you remember what mighty opponents 
they are who stand in the way of efforts of this kind. There is, first, 
stupidity and ignorance, and ‘against stupidity the gods themselves 
contend in vain”’; there is, secondly, crude fanaticism, which threatens 
with the auto-da-fé anyone who attempts to lay a finger on its sacred 
dust and rubbish; thirdly, there is the complete absorption in money- 
making of the great majority who look with cold indifference on every 
idealistic and disinterested endeavor. Yet I do not lose courage; 
I am confident that a better day will succeed this dark night of our 
Judaism. 


And thirty years later an early member of the society, Mr. 
Leopold Mayer, one of the nine who were present at its 
initial meeting, wrote in a reminiscent letter to my father: 


Reform was not accomplished in Chicago in the course of friendly 
promenades. Many a battle was fought, and many were the disillu- 
sions that fell to the lot of those early champions of Reform. It was 
always you who led in the fight. It was always you who heartened our 
small band, encouraged us to new efforts, and clarified our aims for 
us. By word and deed you arrived at the goal of your desires. Do 
you recall the fierce debate you had with Dr. M in my house? 
O many and many a time I have lived over again vividly those early 
days; but the memory arouses in me sad thoughts also, when I com- 
pare the present indifference with the devoted labors of early days.! 





Sinai Congregation came finally into being in June, 1861, 
and my father became its rabbi. He accepted the position 
with hesitation, for which there could have been no reason 
other than his extreme modesty. Whatever doubts lingered 
in his mind as to his own abilities should have been dispelled 
by the unmistakable manner in which both Einhorn and 


t Translated. 





TEACHER IN ISRAEL 29 


Adler had borne testimony to his scholarship, as well as 
to other qualities fitting him for religious leadership. They 
had even taken pains to express themselves formally upon 
the subject. The Zeugniss which Dr. Einhorn sent my 
father in February of that year, and which no doubt he 
wrote with the Chicago congregation in mind, speaks of 
his “thorough knowledge,” his “‘holy ardor,” his “‘excep- 
tional character.”’ A few months later Dr. Adler conferred 
upon him the title of ““Morenu ha-Rab,’’* and in very glowing 
terms referred to his learning, his love of truth, his profoundly 
religious spirit. Freely translated from the Hebrew original, 
these are the concluding words of the document: 

Frankly and openly he will labor and with all the strength of his 


mind,—and his works will bear witness to his righteousness,—for 
learning and wisdom dwell with him,—and piety is his spiritual crown. 


In 1863 Dr. Einhorn bestowed the title upon him for the 
second time, likewise in terms of high appreciation. 

But modesty was in him the most firmly rooted of traits, 
and it would have been natural for him to pause before any 
position of prominence to ask himself and others if he were 
indeed the one best fitted to do its work. In sucha situation 
he was certain to underestimate his own powers. Yet it 
would not be true to say that he had the habit of self- 
depreciation. Under ordinary circumstances his powers and 
abilities did not enter his mind at all; he simply used what 
he possessed. And he instinctively retreated from anything 
which forced attention to him in his personal character. 
His modesty was not self-depreciation, it was not humility; 
for he had the dignity which is lacking to the humble. It 
was that modesty which is the outward sign of absolute self- 
unconsciousness. 


t Literally, ‘“‘our teacher.” The degree or title was that usually conferred 
upon students upon examination. It might be conferred by any rabbi. 


30 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


In connection with my father’s hesitancy in 1861 it is 
of interest to know that in 1860 he had been a candidate for 
a pulpit in Philadelphia. The vote against him there stood 
twenty-five to twenty-three, and the explanation for his non- 
election, as reported to him in all friendship by Dr. Einhorn, 
lay in his oratorical manner—or shall I say his lack of orator- 
ical manner, since he spoke with entire naturalness. On a 
later page I shall speak more fully of this aspect of my father’s 
public life. For there was another occasion when his defects 
as a public speaker—for such they were considered to be— 
affected the course of his life. 

They weighed nothing, however, with the organizers of 
the new congregation. With unanimous voice they urged 
him to become their leader officially as he had been unofh- 
cially during the difficult period now brought to a close. In 
Sinai for August, 1861, a brief paragraph reported that 
‘“‘Felsenthal, in spite of his extreme modesty, was finally 
obliged to yield and accept the position of rabbi and teacher 
with Sinai Congregation. His sermons captivate his 
listeners.”’ 

The event concludes one of the most important epochs 
of his life. Between 1858 and 1861 he had accomplished 
two things. He had put forth in Kol Kore Bamidbar his 
most comprehensive statement on the subject nearest his 
heart, Jewish Reform, and the brief brochure stands out as 
one of the two most valuable of all his writings, most repre- 
sentative and influential. (The second of these two, the 
essay Jiidische Thesen, was not to appear until more than 
forty years later, in 1901.) And he assisted largely in 
creating—if he did not himself create—an institution 
intended to embody in a new section of the country the 
principles of Jewish Reform as set forth in the brochure. 
What the significance of the establishment at that time 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 31 


of a Reform congregation in Chicago of the exact character 
of Sinai was, in the history of middle western or American 
Judaism, can best be described by others. But the fact of 
its significance is acknowledged; in the judgment of many 
this is the most important achievement of my father’s life. 
I would qualify that statement even while I give it as the 
opinion of others. The most important among his achieve- 
ments of a concrete, tangible kind, let us say. For who 
would wish to compare the intangible with the tangible, 
weigh in the same scales his work as a founder with his 
influence as a teacher ? 


The brief period from 1861 to 1863 was one of great 
happiness for my father. In his communal life he enjoyed 
the most gratifying rewards for his efforts; a splendid spirit 
of harmony reigned within the congregation, there was 
mutual friendship and esteem between the members and 
their rabbi. And in his home there was love and peace 
and joy. Early in 1862 he was married to Caroline Levi, 
also from Bavaria, whose acquaintance he had made in 
Chicago. Of this union a child, Ida, was born. And then, 
when Ida was a year old, Caroline Felsenthal died after an 
illness of a week. My father spoke at her funeral, “‘ praising 
God, even while His Hand lay heavy upon him.” ‘Habe 
ich nicht alle Ursache zum Preise des giitigen Gottes? 
Zwei iiberaus gliickliche Jahre verlebte ich mit der Ent- 
schlummerten, ein hiusliches Stillleben, reich an innerm 
Gemiithsfrieden, den sie durch den Adel ihres Herzens und die 
Fille ihrer Liebe zu schaffen verstand.’’ And he thanks the 
departed one “‘fiir die innige Liebe und Treue, die sie mir | 
erwiesen, fiir die zahllosen Lebensfreuden, die sie mir 
bereitet; vor Allem fiir die milde, poetisch schéne Héus- 
lichkeit, die sie mit weiblichem Zartsinn zu_schaffen 


32 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


verstand.” (‘Have I not every reason to praise the good 
God? Two most happy years I have lived with her who 
now lies asleep; our quiet home was blessed with deep 
spiritual peace such as she, in the nobility of her heart and 
the fulness of her love, knew how to create.”” And he thanks 
the departed one “‘for the heartfelt love and loyalty which 
she has shown me; for the numberless joys which she pre- 
pared for me; above all for the quiet and beautiful home 
life which she in her womanly affection knew how to create.’’) 
His words were written down afterward. He could not 
refuse the earnest request of her friends, the members of a 
society to which she had belonged; for them he wrote out 
what he had said. And so there remains for us one more 
proof of the intensity of feeling of which he was capable, 
and his power of control. This was his nature: to feel 
deeply, and to know how, as a man, to subdue his feelings. 


Thus 1864 began sadly, and in the middle of the year 
occurred another painful separation. He tells the incident 
only in part in his Beginnings of Sinat Congregation. It was 
the custom at that time to elect the rabbi for one year only. 
The injustice of this was clear. My father had protested in 
1863 without result, and in 1864, when again elected for so 
short a term, he declined to accept. 

There may have been a second reason for the action of 
the congregation. Much as they honored and loved him 
there were some among the members who were not entirely 
pleased that their rabbi had not all the graces of delivery, all 
the superficial excellences of the popular orator, in addition 
to his other excellences. These men wished to see him re- 
placed by a more effective speaker. 

Of my father’s manner in the pulpit it may be said that 
he had no striking defects, no unpleasant mannerisms, that 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 33 


might distract or annoy the listener, but he had this defect: 
his attention seemed to be on his sermon rather than on the 
people before him. He gave the impression of speaking his 
thoughts aloud rather than addressing an audience. His 
earnestness and deep sincerity had, of course, their own 
effectiveness with those who were more interested in ideas 
than in the purely external manner of their presentation, 
and it can scarcely be doubted that a great part of his 
influence rested upon the fact that he did deeply move men’s 
hearts from pulpit and platform. Yet it is true he was not 
an orator, but a simple-mannered, profoundly thoughtful, 
profoundly religious man speaking. 

Oratory as an art did not, in fact, interest him. He 
believed that the conscious study of ways to impress was 
likely to lead to insincerity and shallowness. He thought 
in a Somewhat similar way of the art of composition. ‘‘Why 
study how to write? Fill your mind with fine thoughts,” 
he once said, “‘and then write as you please.” 


While at Madison my father spoke against slavery a 
number of times before German Republican clubs, and later 
in Chicago preached forcefully on the subject from his 
pulpit. The only piece of anti-slavery writing from his 
pen which remains, however, is an article printed in 1862 
in the Illinois Staatszeitung,' in which, discussing the attitude 
of Jews toward this, ‘‘the most shameful institution on earth,” 
he pours scorn upon the heads of those few (die Fanatiker 
der Ruhe) who detest agitation because of its effect on their 
own material welfare, the disturbance it causes in their 
own private concerns. 

From the Civil War years, it may be important to 
mention also the correspondence he had with Senator Wilson 


t “Tie Juden und die Sclaverei.” Bibliog. 19. 


34 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


of Massachusetts which led to the amending of the law 
regarding field chaplains to read that they shall be “regu- 
larly ordained ministers of some religious denomination’”’— 
“religious” instead of “Christian.” ‘The word Christian 
had been inadvertently used; there was no intention to 
exclude from the army chaplains from non-Christian reli- 
gions.t This is proved by the speed with which the law was 
altered in Congress when once attention was called to its 
unfortunate phraseology. My father was not unduly sensi- 
tive in the matter, but he believed it important to point out 
the unwisdom of having on the statute books, in a land 
where state is absolutely divorced from church, a law which 
read as if the country were officially Christian, and which 
gave the appearance of discrimination between different 
faiths. A dozen years later the point arose in more chal- 
lenging form in connection with the agitation in Chicago 
for Bible reading in the public schools, and at that time my 
father responded to the challenge in a spirited way. In 
1862 he considered it rather a matter of form. When, some 
months after his correspondence with Senator Wilson, an 
actual case of discrimination occurred in the expulsion by 
General Grant of all civilian Jews from the territory within 
his control, he was perhaps more seriously disturbed. He 
protested against the order in a letter to the War Depart- 
ment—unnecessarily, as it proved, for, by order of President 
Lincoln, it had already been rescinded. 

The letter to Mr. Adler, of Lawrenceburg, dated March, 
1859, from which I have already given an extract, gives us 
his point of view on various aspects of national politics: 

How sure of itself the Democratic party was in 1854, even in 


1856; it considered itself quite invincible, a veritable Gibraltar! 
Today things are different, and even though the politicians may 


™ Cf. “Senator Wilson und das Feldpredigergesetz.” Bibliog. 21. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 5 


succeed in sending a Democratic president to the White House in 1860, 
the free soil idea has taken such firm root in the minds of the people 
that it can never be eradicated. No power on earth is strong enough 
for that. Isn’t it true, friend Adler, that you yourself are somewhat 
less enthusiastic for this filibustering, Cuba-covetous, slavery- 
spreading, corrupt Democratic party than you were two years ago? 
If indeed you are still a Democrat at all. It would surprise me very 
much if I heard that you would still give your vote to Buchanan. 

Well, politics are politics. He is fortunate who can keep well out 
of the mire of political affairs, and who has a realm within his home 
where no hostile parties exist, but where all are attached to one another 
in a spirit of love and loyalty. In this realm women have their rights; 
they may even take the president’s chair, and rule by virtue of 
womanly grace and amiability. 


The letter touches also on my father’s private affairs. 
What he said in 1859 applied with equal truth to his circum- 
stances in 1864, or, for that matter, to those of any later 
date. 


As for my outward possessions, they have not increased, nor is 
there any prospect of their doing so. Fortunately I am so made that 
money has no great value for me. ‘“‘Das Geld, das Geld ist eine 
Chimare,’’—you remember the passage in Robert der Teufel. To be 
sure there is some truth in the answer that Baron Rothschild is said 
to have made from his box when he heard these words at the opera 
one night, ‘“‘Wer aber kaan’s hat, ’s ist doch ’ne G’sereh.”” Indeed it 
is, and how many things one must renounce, sorrowfully renounce, for 
which one’s very soul longs. But what is there to do? In such a 
case one is fortunate if he can preserve the equanimity of the stoic, 
and if he can say in the words of the old folk-song, ‘‘ Freund, ich bin 
zufrieden, geh’ es wie es will.” 


IV 


RABBI AT ZION 
1864-1887 


By this time Chicago had grown in population and 
territory, and many Jewish families had settled on the 
‘West Side,” as the section west of the Chicago River was 
called. Among these were a number of ‘‘Reform Jews.” 
On account of the distance from Sinai Temple, they felt the 
need of an organization of their own, and Zion Congregation 
was accordingly established in the summer of 1864, and my 
father invited to its pulpit. 

His ministry began on Rosh ha-Shanah with the preach- 
ing of a noble sermon in which he once again set forth 
his convictions on the subject of Reform. His views were 
fully shared by the group of men who were gathered together 
at Zion, they were eager to follow where he led, and Zion 
from the beginning took its place beside Sinai as one of 
the leading Reform congregations of the West. Early 
Reform in Chicago, it may be said in passing, had its very 
distinctive character, and its religious earnestness and clear 
understanding of the relation of sound scholarship to Jewish 
religious leadership have been in large part attributed to my 
father’s influence. 

For twenty-three long, active years my father was rabbi 
of Zion. To Zion he gave unlimited devotion, and its 
members in turn repaid him with deepest respect and appreci- 
ation and affection. 

The relation he held toward them was the double one 
of teacher and friend. ‘‘Teacher” is the word that indicates 

36 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 37 


best what his conception was of the position of rabbi. Their 
friend he was in the close personal sense, for, especially 
during the earlier years, the congregation, its members all 
of German birth, formed an intimate social group as well 
as a religious organization. ‘They exchanged informal visits; 
were interested in each other’s family affairs. My father 
was intimately of this group; at the same time he held a 
very special place in the hearts of the members of his congre- 
gation. ‘‘Beloved teacher!’ This was the term which gave 
him the greatest joy to hear. ‘‘ Believe me,” he exclaims in 
an early English sermon, addressed chiefly to the young 
people, ‘‘believe me, I beg you, when I say that my greatest 
happiness in life would be to perceive that around me 
congregate boys and girls, men and women, saying, ‘You 
are our beloved teacher and friend, your words have not 
fallen upon barren ground, we listen to you, and we strive 
to heed your words, and to conform our lives to them.’ I 
beg you repeatedly, encourage me in this way.” If not all 
his words were fully heeded—as in this case, where his special 
plea was for observance of the Sabbath—yet in some measure 
the happiness of which he speaks was granted to him. On 
many a special occasion, as also in their constant attitude, 
his congregation gave proof that they looked upon him as 
their beloved teacher and friend. Until well into the 
eighties, this most gratifying, most happy relationship 
continued without hint of change. 

My mother, whose name was Henriette Blumenfeld, came 
to my father’s house in 1864 to make a home for him and 
to take the place of mother to the little girl Ida. She had 
come to America from Wiirttemberg, Germany, as a young 
girl, some eight years before. In 1865 my father and mother 
were married, and she became mother to Ida in a truer sense, 
as well as true helpmate in a thousand ways to my father. 


38 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Very soon they had a common grief to bear in the death 
of Ida, who died at three, “‘a lovely, lovely, extraordinarily 
promising child, to whom the father’s soul’’—thus he spoke 
at her funeral—‘‘had clung as Jacob’s to Benjamin, and 
whose childish devotion had brought him such deep and 
pure happiness as could not be expressed.” Repeating the 
words of Job, my father bade Ida farewell. 

The year after their marriage, my parents moved into 
a pleasant roomy house in what was then a pleasant neigh- 
borhood (it is now part of the Hull-House district) and 
lived there nineteen years, a stretch of time nearly coinci- 
dent with the period of my father’s active ministry. I 
suppose, of the various houses in which he lived in Chicago, 
this seemed to him the one that was most truly “home.” 
Plain and comfortable as it was, and with space on every 
side, like an old house in a small town, it suited well his 
tastes and habits. In this house we, his five children, were 
born, and here he enjoyed years satisfying in work and 
comparatively free from personal care. 

A half-mile from our house stood the very unpretentious 
little building in which the congregation worshiped from 
1869 to 1885, and during this time my father’s external life 
revolved about these two places, the house on Desplaines 
Street and the little white frame ‘‘Temple,”’ with its two 
outside stairways, at Jackson and Sangamon. 

“The rabbi’s life is a busy one,” he wrote early in this 
period, mentioning charities, societies, teaching, and congre- 
gational matters. In addition he read constantly—auntil 
early morning, my mother used to tell us—and lectured 
and wrote much. 

During the first years of Zion’s existence he taught daily 
in the congregational combined secular and religious school. 
Later the school assembled only for the usual hour or two 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 39 


on Saturday and Sunday mornings, but this was a change he 
could scarcely have welcomed, since it meant just so much 
less of Jewish knowledge acquired by the children. On the 
subject of the importance of Jewish education for the people 
in general, he had strong convictions, and expressed his 
views a number of times. ‘‘ We should take care,” he wrote, 
“that in American Israel there are not on one side a few 
learned priests, and on the other side thousands of ignorant 
laymen.”* But the spirit of the times, the demands of 
general education, the environment in general, combined to 
make impossible even comparatively intensive study in the 
religious schools. 

My father had very definite ideas on certain of the larger 
questions of the religious school; in particular, he was inter- 
ested in what was and what was not suitable as subject- 
matter to present to little children.2 He would postpone, 
for instance, premature discussion of theories of creation 
and begin with hero tales. He would omit miracle stories 
and emphasize those parts of the Bible ‘which convey great 
moral. and religious lessons, which are apt to influence and 
shape our inner life for the better.” These views are exactly 
what one would expect from one of his mental make-up. 
He was himself less interested in philosophical speculation 
than in history. And it was the ethical and religious aspects 
of every subject that occupied him first. Add to these 
facts his understanding of the spirit of childhood in general, 
and we see the clear relation between his expressed opinions 
on this subject of Bible teaching and his own qualities of 
mind. | 

In respect of organization and administration, my father’s 
school was, I think simply the average one of its day. His 

1 Cf. Bibliog. 99. 

2 Cf. ‘‘Biblical History in Our Sabbath Schools.” Bibliog. 227. 


40 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


chief success lay, there is no question, in the influence of his 
personality. He had a moral ardor which tended to com- 
municate itself to others. Men and women, thinking back 
to the time they were his pupils, remember him, not as one 
in whom it had been natural to confide their small affairs, 
but as a teacher, high-minded and kindly natured, with 
whom it had been a privilege to be in contact. 

On his side there was affection and genuine interest. 
This birthday postcard written in 1876 to a bright-natured 
young girl of whom he was fond is characteristic: 


Good morning, my dear friend, Miss Mary G. 


It gives me very special pleasure on this, your birthday, to join 
your many other friends who are offering you their cordial congratula- 
tions. I should like to tell you all the fine and beautiful things I 
wish for you, but I shall sum up everything by saying, May He who 
rules our destinies open before you a bright and beautiful and sunny 
path through life, which you . . . and so on, and soon. You will 
easily be able to finish the sentence for yourself. One so intelligent 
as you will find no difficulty in completing half-sentences, and one 
who, like yourself, possesses both a noble heart and a wise head, who 
beautifully unites purity of soul with clearness of mind will find it a 
simple and delightful task to create happiness for herself and others. 

Now, dear Mary, just imagine a few dozen pages added to this, 
all written over with the most charming good wishes for you, with 
thoughts which could only come from the pens of the most inspired 
poets, and say to yourself that all these splendid thoughts and heartfelt 
wishes are dedicated to you as a birthday offering by your cousin and 
friend and former teacher, 

B. FELSENTHAL 


Mary G., returning the card a quarter of a century later,’ 
wrote of the “kindly judgment and sweet nature” of her 
“loved old teacher.’’ 

When my father spoke of societies which took much of 
his time, he must have had in mind, first of all, the B’nai 

™ Then Mrs. Charles Haas. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL AI 


B’rith. He became a very active member immediately 
after coming to Chicago, and from then to the end of his 
life his interest in the order never ceased. He believed that 
B’nai B’rith was an organization which could work with 
great effectiveness for the general social advancement of the 
Jews of the country, and he supported its philanthropic and 
educational program with enthusiasm. His share in its work 
was of a more practical kind than one might have expected 
from a man of his scholarly interests. He worked on con- 
stitution and relief committees; he served as officer of local 
and district lodges; he attended conventions; spoke in his 
usual forceful way on its affairs, urging, characteristically, 
greater democracy of organization, abandonment of the 
element of secrecy which had been borrowed from the 
Masonic and other orders on which this had been modeled, 
abandonment, also, of the utterly childish feature, as it 
seemed to him, of the wearing of regalia.* 

Not infrequently he made addresses before the Chicago 
lodges. ‘Two of his published pamphlets were originally such 
lodge addresses. One of these, in 1866, discussed at length 
the subject of Jewish education in America; the other, 
delivered in 1869, was on Christian missions, and was 
occasioned by the efforts of a missionary society which 
existed in Chicago at the time to make converts among the 
Jews. In general, one may say of his lodge addresses that 
they were of serious Jewish interest, but were not on sub- 
jects which he would have thought precisely suitable for 
the pulpit. In B’nai B’rith he found a convenient platform 
from which to express opinions on general Jewish topics. 

There was another society before which, between the 
years 1877 and 1884, my father often spoke. ‘Zion Lit.,”’ 
as it was affectionately called by its members (for Zion 

* Cf. “Minority Report” (Annual session, D. G. L. No. 2, 1867). Bibliog. 33. 


42 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Literary Association), was a club of young men and women 
whose families ‘‘belonged”’ to the congregation. They met 
to read essays to each other, to listen to addresses from 
invited speakers, and to enjoy extremely sociable times. 
My father spoke to these young people on ‘“Self- 
Improvement,” on ‘Schiller,’ on chapters in mediaeval 
Jewish history, and sometimes he selected what one might 
call sermon topics, such as “The Eternal and Transient 
Elements in Judaism,” ‘‘Who Is a Jew 2” and so forth. It 
is interesting to note that, simple as his customary style was 
in writing and speaking, his tone here was a shade more 
‘popular,’ even, than was usual. Some of his most direct 
and epigrammatic statements on matters of vital Jewish 
interest, some of his most vivid and glowing passages occur 
in these long-forgotten addresses before ‘‘Zion Lit.” 


He was pleasantly acquainted during these early years 
with a number of the leaders of liberal Christianity in Chi- 
cago. I havea shadowy recollection of one of these ministers, 
the one whom I think my father knew best, Dr. Thomas of 
the People’s Church, a tall, friendly man who came some- 
times to our house, and who wrote to my father in a tone of 
affection. During the early eighties, possibly also before 
then, he and my father and others among the liberals used 
to meet for informal discussion, calling themselves the 
“Round Table.’”? My father talked to them once on mod- 
ern Judaism,’ no doubt welcoming the opportunity to correct 
in the minds of a few persons of influence some of the mis- 
taken impressions regarding Jews and Judaism which he 
observed were so common among even educated Christians. 
He tells on one occasion of being asked to describe the man- 
ner in which the Jews of today prepared their temple sacri- 


* Cf. On the Present Status of Modern Judaism. Bibliog. 136. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 43 


fices. The simplicity and modernity of liberal Judaism, as 
he expounded it, may have been a surprise even to some of 
the members of the ‘“‘ Round Table.” 

An interesting incident of the time has been related from 
another point of view by Dr. John Haynes Holmes in his 
biography of Robert Collyer. Dr. Collyer had invited my 
father to take part in the dedication exercises of the new 
Unitarian church, only to find later that there was a min- 
ority of considerable size among the Unitarian membership 
to whom the sight of a Jew on their platform on that occasion 
would be unwelcome. It seemed best to him to withdraw 
the invitation, and he did so in a frank and fine letter which 
was received by my father in friendly and understanding 
spirit. 

Of greater importance was the occurrence of 1869 when 
a missionary society, the Western Hebrew Christian Brother- 
hood, established themselves in Chicago and attempted to 
make converts. My father resented their presence hotly, 
wrote denunciatory letters to the papers,’ and before his 
B’nai B’rith lodge delivered a long and vigorous address on 
missions, with particular reference, naturally, to missions to 
the Jews. In the course of this address he asks the question, 
‘“‘But who are the missionaries of the Jews? Shall we do 
nothing for the spread of Jewish ideas?” and he names as 
Jewish missionaries “‘the printing press, and the telegraph, 
and Lessing’s Nathan the Wise, and Renan, and Channing, 
and Parker, and unprejudiced (Jiberalen) teachers of history, 
and all those who work against the forces of superstition and 
darkness.” The address was issued as a pamphlet? (I have 
already mentioned it in connection with his B’nai B’rith 


Cf. “‘The Jewish Christian Mission,’” Bibliog. 45, and “Conversion of 
Jews,” Bibliog. 47. 
2 Kritik des christlichen Missionswesens. Bibliog. 44. 


A4 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


activity), but-being in German, was probably limited in its 
influence. However, this particular missionary society soon 
withdrew from Chicago, having accomplished nothing. 

Dr. Collyer did splendid service for the Jews at this time, 
speaking from his pulpit so bravely and forcibly that an 
orthodox Christian weekly called him ‘‘ Rabbi Collyer” and 
made the satirical proposal that the Unitarian churches make 
themselves over into synagogues. ‘There is a sentence or 
two in Dr. Collyer’s sermon on the folly of attempting to 
convert the Jews which it is more than probable were an 
echo from what my father had said in lecture or conversa- 
tion. Speaking of liberal Judaism and its exponents, 
Collyer’s words are, “The rationalistic party is growing 
daily. The best men among them... claim our own 
great and devout Channing, our own scholarly and sincere 
Parker, as members of the true Israel.” 

My father did indeed deeply admire these great Uni- 
tarians, and in the essentials of religion was aware of no 
differences between their beliefs and his own. “Many 
roads lead to Rome. And from many points of the circum- 
ference radii travel toward the same centre,” he said, refer- 
ring to the religiously liberal-minded, and he took a natural 
and profound pride in the fact that it was Jewish thought 
(even though not always recognized as such) which they 
were laboring to spread in the world. 

His perfect sympathy with progressiveness in religious 
thinking is indicated by the fact that, in 1879, he was 
elected one of the twelve honorary vice-presidents of the Free 
Religious Association, of which Professor Felix Adler was 
president at the time, and among whose other vice-presidents 
were Emerson, George William Curtis, Lydia Maria Child, 
and Thomas Wentworth Higginson. On the one side he 
stood in friendliest relations with the orthodox among his 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL A5 


own people, on the other side with those who were the 
freest thinkers in other churches and sects, or who, for 
religious reasons, had separated themselves from all churches. 

Though much out of place as to date, let me quote here 
from a letter that came from Dr. Thomas in 1889. My 
father had sent him an article he had just published on 
Sabbath-school teaching. Dr. Thomas expresses his “hearty 
and unqualified approval” and goes on to say: 

What you have said applies equally to the Christian S. S. as well as 
to the Jewish. There is no greater need in the religious world of 
today than for proper and helpful instruction of the millions of chil- 
dren in the S.S. . . . One cannot doubt that some one will be called 
to lead in this needed reform; and why, my venerable friend and 
brother, should not the good work be done by you? Surely no one 
is better qualified by ripe scholarship, and devout spirit, and a deep 
sympathy for children, and for the welfare of the rising generations. 

Here was religious unity and brotherly spirit indeed! 

He spoke before the Young Men’s Christian Union in 
their Sunday evening lecture series, on one occasion dis- 
cussing, in a tone of lofty enthusiasm, the gifts which Israel 
has made to humanity—the Bible, monotheism, the moral 
laws which govern Western civilization.’ 

He had also various interesting acquaintanceships and 
contacts in the non-Jewish scholarly world. For two or 
three successive years, early in the eighties, he lectured before 
theological students and ministers in the Hebrew Summer 
School at Morgan Park, of which Dr. William Rainey Harper, 
afterward president of the University of Chicago, was the 
leading spirit. (In 1866 my father had received the honorary 
degree of Ph.D. from the old University of Chicago.) He 
contributed occasionally to journals devoted to the study 
of Hebrew and wrote book reviews in his special subject for 
the Nation. 


Cf. The Wandering Jew, p. 195, this volume. 


46 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL . 


But these things were after all quite incidental; his main 
interest lay in the field of specifically Jewish affairs. The 
great event to record from the first decade of his ministry 
is his participation in the rabbinical conference which took 
place in Philadelphia in 1869, when the leaders of Jewish 
Reform in America (Einhorn, Adler, Hirsch, Wise, and 
others) met to discuss matters of vital importance for the 
progress of reform. It was a conference memorable for the 
liberal character of the resolutions passed, and not unimpor- 
tant, my father thought, in its influence on American Juda- 
ism. He never ceased to regret that, “‘as a result of deplor- 
able circumstances, it was not followed by other con- 
ferences.” I quote here words he wrote more than twenty 
years later.t He is referring to the breach between the 
leaders which did not indeed begin at the meeting itself, 
but which was connected with it in ways which need not 
be described in this place. It is sufficient to say that in his 
opinion ‘‘disunion’’ was a thing of serious consequence for 
American Judaism. He wrote with frank indignation about 
its causes at the time, and thought sadly, even with some 
bitterness, about it to the end of his days. 

My father took the opportunity in this conference again 
to express his opinion on the subject of Jewish theological 
schools in America.?, He had done so before in his pamphlet 
on Jiidisches Schulwesen in 1866; he did so later, in ’73 and 
*76. It seems to have been an issue of the time, and one 
that he considered of surpassing importance. In his judg- 
ment the time was not ripe—would not be ripe for years 
to come—for the establishment here of a rabbinical college. 
One reason for this was that the atmosphere in ‘‘noisy and 
turbulent America” was not conducive to the making of 


™ Cf. “Samuel Adler. Nekrolog.” Bibliog. 237. 
‘Cf. “Antrige.” Bibliog. s9A. 





TEACHER IN ISRAEL 47 


scholars. Since Germany still remained the fountainhead of 
Jewish learning, the plan which seemed best to him was to 
send young men abroad for their rabbinical preparation. 
Sound scholarship is a sine qua non for the Jewish rabbi— 
this is the keynote of all his expressions on the subject. 

I remember a young man of seventeen or eighteen once 
coming to him (it may have been about 1900) to ask my 
father’s opinion on the advisability of his beginning then to 
study to bea rabbi. My father told him it was far too late, 
advised him to choose another profession, said it would be 
impossible for him now to acquire the learning in Hebrew 
and other fields which the rabbi ought to have. 

It is interesting also in running through the report of this 
Philadelphia meeting to see that my father agreed heartily 
with the statements made by the conference in regard to the 
‘mission of Israel’’; and to notice that he characterizes as 
“romantic”? a certain Palestine colonization project of the 
time, one to which Adolphe Crémieux, among others, had 
lent his support. He thinks it would be well to enter protest 
against it. This is interesting in view of his later ardent 
advocacy of Zionism and his emphatic repudiation of the 
theory that to fulfil its mission the Jewish people must be 
scattered over the face of the earth. One should read in 
connection with his remarks here his 1902 article, “* Jewish 
Weltanschauung, Israel’s Mission, and Kindred Concep- 
tions.” There, in words which he puts into the mouths of 
Einhorn, Samuel Hirsh, Geiger, and other long-dead pio- 
neers of Reform, speaking in Gan Eden (Paradise), one finds 
the explanation for his own whole-hearted acceptance at 
this earlier time of the mission idea. 


In the affairs of the community in general, my father 
seldom attempted to make his influence felt in a large way. 


48 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


He once took the initiative in an educational matter, when, 
in 1881, he headed a petition for systematic ethical instruc- 
tion in the public schools. This paper, a characteristic bit 
of writing, contained an expression of opinion as to the 
utilitarian character of American education and a brief out- 
line of a graded course in everyday ethics. Another time, 
when the attempt was being made by citizens of Chicago to 
persuade the Board of Education to reintroduce Bible reading 
into the schools, he raised his voice in strong objection. To 
present the sacred literature of any group, even though that 
group constituted the majority of the people, would be, he 
said, ‘‘an inexcusable, an undemocratic, an un-American 
tyrannizing of the minority.” This may have been the view 
which the Board also took of the matter. At any rate, they 
took no action. His petition in regard to ethical instruction, 
however, was received without favor. 

My father was an interested observer of politics, but with 
one exception he did not, after slavery times, publicly 
express himself on the issues of the day. The exception 
occurred in 1882, when he wrote a column in the Chicago 
Tribune on Sunday laws, prohibition, and blind party loyalty 
in local affairs. The article was cast into the form of a 
letter to the voters of the Fourth Senatorial District, in which 
my father announced himself as a candidate for the state 
legislature. For a dozen reasons it is impossible to think that 
he intended his candidacy to be taken seriously; he merely 
chose to write in this eye-arresting way in order to secure a 
larger number of readers for the little preachment on reli- 
gious tolerance and personal liberty and enlightened citizen- 
ship which his letter in effect was. 

This appeared, as I say, in the Chicago Tribune, its subject 
making it suitable for publication in a general newspaper. 
But religious articles from my father’s pen also appeared in 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 49 


the secular dailies, in the Illinois Staatszeitung especially, 
with surprising frequency. In the case of the Staatszeitung 
the fact that no inconsiderable proportion of the readers of 
the paper were German Jews may be explanation enough for 
the editor’s readiness to publish material distinctly Jewish 
in scope. The articles in the English papers bear witness 
chiefly to the interest of the general public of that day in 
religious discussion; perhaps they offer too some slight 
evidence of the absence of any serious amount of anti- 
Jewish feeling. 

The larger number of my father’s writings were of course 
published in the monthlies and weeklies of the Jewish press. 
Dealing with subjects which in many cases have lost all but 
their historical significance, what he wrote was in great part. 
ephemeral. Yet however slight the intrinsic value of these 
articles, these addresses, these “‘letters to the editor,’ may 
be, after the passage of so many years, they show forth 
clearly many and many a trait of his character and intellect— 
his kindliness, his sympathy for human suffering, his passion 
for scholarly exactness, his optimism, his quiet humor, as 
when he quoted Faust, ‘‘Es much doch auch solche Kéuze 
geben” (‘‘there have to be queer fellows like that’’), apply- 
ing the sentence to himself. 

A review of Berthold Auerbach’s Briefe, written in 1885, 
is illuminating as to my father’s attitude toward the ethical 
aspects of imaginative literature. He finds it wholly praise- 
worthy that Auerbach, in his Dorfgeschichten, is animated 
first of all by ethical motives. Appreciating both moral and 
aesthetic values in literature, there was no question in his 
mind as to which was of first importance. A similar 
thought is expressed in ‘“‘Jiidische Zeit- und Streitfragen,” 
where, comparing the influence of art and religion upon the 
inner life, he maintains that religion is of immeasurably 


50 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


greater value. It may be true, he says, referring to a line 
of Goethe’s,? that, to one like Goethe, art and science may 
take the place of religion: they can never do so with the rank 
and file of humanity. 

Zur Proselytenfrage im Judenthum, which my father wrote 
in 1878, is the longest and best-known of his writings of this 
period. Discussing the rites which a proselyte must undergo 
on becoming a Jew, and the larger question which this 
involved of the universal character of the Jewish religion, he 
took, as was consistent, the liberal as against the traditional 
view. From both Orthodox and Reform quarters his posi- 
tion was vehemently assailed—both assailed and defended. 
One of those who agreed with my father was the Galician 
scholar, O. H. Schorr, whom my father greatly admired and 
whose support he was proud to have. The pamphlet was 
an entirely characteristic piece of writing, in its historical 
method of attacking the problem and in its “frank and 
cordial tone’ (to use the words of one of its reviewers), as 
well as in its point of view. It was another illustration of 
the way in which conservative and liberal tendencies bal- 
anced each other in my father’s mind. On the one side, there 
was his deep reverence for things of the past, his firm convic- 
tion that the soundest growth is built upon the past; on the 
other side, there was his entire willingness to consider every 
proposed reform, every public (or private) question from the 
point of view of its inherent reasonableness. 


It was a paradox in his life that he, a man of peace, was 
occasionally involved in controversies. There was this one 
on proselytism which followed the publication of .his pam- 
phlet; there was the one with Professor Delitzsch, of which 
I shall speak on another page; and there were others. He 
held his opinions firmly and defended them vigorously, 


*“Wer Wissenschaft und Kunst besitzt, der hat auch Religion.” 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 51 


though without a trace of dogmatism. In personal rela- 
tions, too, he was the reverse of dogmatic or magisterial. 

Once or twice he was personally attacked in the press, and 
on these rare occasions, he replied in a spirited way. He was 
gentle and peace-loving—so truly a lover of peace that the 
sound of voices in dissension caused him visible suffering; 
but slander and the injection of personalities into public 
affairs roused his extreme indignation, and caused words of 
anger to flow even from his kindly pen. 


There were, of course, many hours when my father 
occupied himself with lighter matters, when he turned from 
his scholarly books to the daily paper, or to other books, and 
from the writing of articles to correspondence, and, with the 
greatest possible pleasure, to friends. I think of three with 
whom he was especially intimate—Henry Greenebaum, 
Julius Rosenthal, Rabbi Liebmann Adler. His friendship 
with Mr. Greenebaum (Uncle Henry) had an affectionate, 
brotherly character, was based on admiration and enjoyment 
each of the other’s personality rather than on likeness of 
mind or temperament. They were strikingly different in 
very many ways: Uncle Henry vivacious, active, overflow- 
ing with enthusiasm, always radiantly happy, delighting in 
the company of young people, with the manner and charm. 
of a cultivated man of the world, an admirer of scholarship 
but not himself a scholar; my father, satisfied to touch life 
at fewer points than Uncle Henry, quiet, and with a scholar’s 
mind and tastes. They were alike in their way of looking at 
all problems from a standpoint of high idealism. It was not 
easy to resist the magnetism of Uncle Henry’s personality, 
and on my father he had a tonic effect. In turn my father’s 
calm wisdom was a never-failing source of inspiration to 
Uncle Henry. 


52 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Uncle Henry was my father’s enthusiastic supporter in 
the congregation, and they worked side by side in B’nai 
B’rith. They met often in lodgeroom and synagogue and 
office, made frequent visits to each other’s houses, and knew 
and cared about each other’s most intimate concerns. 

With Mr. Rosenthal, who was one of Chicago’s most 
respected and scholarly lawyers, my father enjoyed many 
hours of delightful intellectual companionship. He used to 
visit him in his office; Mr. Rosenthal was never unwilling to 
interrupt his work to talk with my father of literature, of 
new books in Jewish science, of points in Jewish law, or of 
similar serious topics. Several of my father’s articles were 
based on conversations with Mr. Rosenthal, or were sug- 
gested by him. He was the rare example of a layman 
intensely interested in Jewish learning. He bought books 
in this field, shared them with my father, seconded his efforts 
to gain support in Chicago for this or that literary enterprise. 
On one occasion, in a letter written in 1877, my father took 
Mr. Rosenthal to task for sending, or for encouraging others 
to send books to a library of Jewish literature outside of 
Chicago, his reason being that this would prevent the estab- 
lishment of such a library in Chicago. He had had this at 
heart for twenty years, had spoken with others regarding the 
matter, “‘but I can achieve practical results in nothing.” 
His mood of discouragement was not entirely justified, 
for, to mention one instance of successful effort of the 
kind on his part, it was due directly to his suggestion 
that a certain valuable collection of Hebraica and Judaica 
was brought over from Amsterdam in 1868 by Temple 
Emanu-El of New York.'' This library was presented to 
Columbia College in 1892 and is now a part of the university 
library. 

* Cf. “A Valuable Library to be Sold.” _Bibliog. 40. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 5G 


Evidently Mr. Rosenthal and my father did not always 
carry on their discussions in entirely serious fashion; for 
after one of their talks my father went home to write 
what represents his highest overflowing of spirits, a parody 
of a scene in Faust,t into which, playing upon their names 
(Felsenthal, valley of rocks; Rosenthal, valley of roses), 
he put himself and his friend as characters—Petraula and 
Vallisrosarum. It is a gay little piece, with a chorus, 
Jufivallera! Jufivallera! Only Mr. Rosenthal, of all my 
father’s acquaintance, could, I believe, have inspired him 
to just this sort of expression. He had exactly that 
type of quiet intellectual humor which my father knew how 
to appreciate, and to which it was most easy for him to make 
response. 

Mr. Rosenthal and my father exchanged frequent letters, 
writing most often on literary topics, and continuing dis- 
cussions begun in Mr. Rosenthal’s office. The following 
refers evidently to some such friendly debate: 

Gegner, doppelt iiberlegen, 
Ausgeriistet mit zwiefalter 

Waff’ als Dichter und Sachwalter; 
Wenn ich dir mich stell’ entgegen, 
Nenn’ ich’s um so mehr verwegen, 
Als, wie du mir selbst gedroht, 
Dir als Anwalt dar sich bot 

Gute Sach’ und mir die schlechte; 
Dass mir bangt, wie ich verfechte 
Falschheit gegen Treu im Tod. 


DEAR Mr. ROSENTHAL: 


I adopt the above lines in all sincerity as a motto for this letter, 
and with them close the discussion we have been having with each 
other during the last few days. They shall serve, mutatis mutandis, 


t Noch a paar Schnaderhiipferle, zu ‘Faust, zer Theil, einzuschalten auf S.170 
Bibliog. 315. 


54 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


as my friendly last words. A bit of literary history will help to explain 
the original meaning of the verses. Sixty years ago Uhland and 
Riickert debated with each other in verse on the subject, whether the 
death or the faithlessness of the beloved one inflicts the greater sorrow. 
Uhland began with a poem of four ten-line stanzas, and Riickert 
responded with one of the same length. ‘The stanza which I give here 
is the first in Riickert’s poem. 

It was my intention at the beginning of this week to entice you, if 
possible, into public debate, but I was not successful. What you said 
to me in private might have been repeated before a larger public. 
The subject is by no means exhausted. You will readily admit that. 


Yours, with best greetings, 


B. FELSENTHAL 
Cuicaco, Dec. 2, 1886 


On Mr. Rosenthal’s seventy-fifth birthday, in 1903, my 
father sent him a characteristic letter* in which, in dialogue 
form, two voices, Me and Not-me (Ich and Nicht-Ich) debate 
whether he shall address Mr. Rosenthal as alter Junge or 
qunger Alte. “It all depends,” he finally concludes, “on 
where you wish to lay the emphasis—on the number of 
years, or on mind and heart. . . . I think I will address my 
letter Lieber alter Junge.” At the close he quotes a stanza 
from Vischer, written in the poet’s old age: “‘Ihr Leiden- 
schaften ade!—Euer Scheiden thut mir nicht weh!—Nur 
eine mocht ich behalten, ja eine—den Zorn auf das Schlechte, 
das Gemeine!” (“Ye passions, farewell!—I feel no regret 
that you leave me—One only would I wish to retain— 
Hatred for all that is vulgar and mean!’’) The old Suabian’s 
thought pleases him greatly, and he has taken it for his 
motto. He believes that Mr. Rosenthal also will heartily 
subscribe to it, and signs himself, ‘‘ Your 81-year-old young 
friend.” | 

Dr. Adler, deep-voiced, kindly, lovable rabbi of Kehil- 
lath Anshe Maarabh (the congregation in Chicago which 


* This letter is given in full, Appendix, p. 107. 


——eeEeEeEeEe—eeee ee ee = — —— = 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 55 


stood midway between Reform and Orthodoxy), was so much 
like my father in general outlines of character that it is 
enough to quote from my father’s characterization of him (in 
his memorial address, spoken in 1892) to make plain the 
attraction each had for the other. ‘‘Of simple and childlike 
nature—satisfied with his lot—without a trace of envy or 
unkindness—a lover of peace—gentle and modest—cheer- 
ful of spirit,’ my father describes him to be. The two were 
indeed Geistesverwandten, to use an expression my father 
loved; having, moreover, similar intellectual interests, they 
delighted doubly in each other’s company, met when they 
could, and counted each other’s friendship among the truly 
satisfying things of life. 

I have mentioned my father’s large correspondence as 
one of his diversions. I believe in his case it may truly 
be called that. Certainly no more conscientious or punc- 
tual correspondent than he ever existed. And if it was a 
pleasure for him to express himself in letters to friends, 
what joy must have been his when he read the letters others 
wrote to him! For there is scarcely one among the hun- 
dreds of those which are still in existence, but has some 
heart-warming expression of extreme respect, of admiration, 
or of love.. I have in mind, when I say this, the correspond- 
ence of his entire life, from the sixties and seventies on, not 
only that of the period of which I have been writing. Inti- 
mate, friendly letters came from Szold and Mielziner and the 
elder Gottheil and Alexander Kohut; from Deutsch and 
from Felix Adler; from George Kohut and Richard Gottheil; 
from Isidor Busch and Simon Wolf; from Henrietta Szold. 
From Europe came letters from Geiger and Schorr and 
Steinschneider and Berliner and Chwolson and Derenbourg 
and Kayserling and Buber; from humbler folk also. They 
wrote of doctrinal or Talmudic matters, of Hebrew libraries , 


56 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


of Hebrew bibliography (a subject of the very greatest 
interest to my father), of educational or philanthropic move- 
ments in the Jewish world, and they wrote too of their 
private interests, and of themselves, and with great love and 
respect, as I have said, of my father. 

No small part of my father’s correspondence was carried 
on in Hebrew. In this language he exchanged letters with 
orthodox rabbis, both here and in Europe, with editors of 
Hebrew journals, with authors of Hebrew books, frequently 
with men quite unknown to him, who wrote for information 
or advice. ‘Thus, for example, someone writes from Prussia 
to ask whether it would be advisable to emigrate to America. 
How soon could one who had studied medicine abroad obtain 
the degree of M.D. in the United States? And could one 
support himself in the meantime by giving lessons in 
Hebrew? A letter written by my father asks for information 
about Jewish life in Roumania. Other letters refer to Tal- 
mudic questions or to matters of Jewish doctrine. Some are 
quite casual. On the whole there is no great difference either 
in subject matter or in cordiality of tone between these 
Hebrew letters and the others in English or German, and 
they are mentioned here chiefly because they were an element 
of decided interest in my father’s life. 


It was about 1884 that the desire of the young people of 
Zion Congregation for more English in the pulpit began to 
manifest itself. My father appreciated the reasonableness 
of their preference; from as far back as 1871 he had preached 
in English not infrequently. But he had never entirely 
mastered the language; though he wrote it easily and clearly, 
even impressively, there were certain Germanisms that clung 
to him, and, what mattered more, he spoke English with a 
German accent. German was his language, it will be remem- 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 57 


bered, until he was thirty-two. He preferred to speak it; 
and there were still enough older foreign-born members in 
the congregation to justify its continued use to some extent 
in the pulpit. To solve the difficulty, an assistant rabbi was 
engaged for a year or two, and later, in 1887, my father was 
made Rabbi Emeritus. His immediate successor was Rabbi 
Joseph Stolz. 

Two years previously the congregation had left their 
pleasant little temple and built more pretentiously in a newer 
neighborhood to which, in the expansion of the city, the 
members had gravitated. We joined the others. The 
neighborhood in which our house stood had been steadily 
going down in respectability, and my parents, with the 
savings from a modest salary (remarkable feat of manage- 
ment, this of my mother’s, to put something away each year 
from that small income), bought a house less picturesque 
and comfortable looking than the one on Desplaines Street, 
but nearer our friends and the new temple. 

Here, freed from official duties, my father was able to 
spend long hours in his library, at his writing table, or in his 
old high-backed yellow reading-chair. He by no means 
withdrew from participation in Jewish affairs, was able, 
indeed, to exert through his pen quite as great an influence 
as before; but to some extent the period which now began 
may be thought of as one of scholarly retirement. 


V 


IN RETIREMENT 
1887-1897 


THE last twenty years of my father’s life divide them- 
selves into two periods, according to the section of the city we 
lived in. There was the Randolph Street period, ending in 
1897, then the South Side period; 1897 happens also to be 
the year in which my father, according to his own statement, 
began to be active in the Zionist movement. ‘The date is 
therefore one of real significance in his life. 

The ten years following his retirement, during which we 
continued to live on the West Side, were outwardly un- 
eventful. He made occasional addresses, officiated for short 
periods at Zion during the absence of its rabbi, attended at 
rare intervals lodge or rabbinical conferences, worked in 
various ways in the interest of the Russian Jewish immi- 
grants of the city; but for the most part, as I have said, he 
followed the scholar’s quiet routine. 

He began even before this time, though without the 
slightest reason, to refer to his advancing age. ‘“‘ You see 
from this letter that Bernhard is beginning to grow old,” he 
wrote in 1885 to his intimate friend, Elias Greenebaum. Mr. 
Greenebaum contradicted this emphatically, saying that his 
writing was “‘ardent and youthful; stimulating, elevating, 
and instructive as it had ever been.” And certain it is that 
he did not, even at seventy, seem more than elderly to us of 
his household, and there is abundant reason to believe that 
this was the impression he made also upon others. His 
health was good, his constitution hardy, and he suffered only 
rarely from any indisposition. 

58 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 59 


In particular, he had a remarkably healthy nervous 
system. Even when harassed by private troubles, he could 
go to his study and write with vigor and enthusiasm on 
subjects of public interest. As children we did not hesitate 
to interrupt him for any trivial reason. He never showed 
annoyance and was able, the moment the interruption was 
over, to go back with perfect ease to his writing, or, as was 
his habit, to pacing his study floor with thoughts bent 
inwardly. 

He was as unassuming in the family circle as he was in 
the world outside. He could never bear to “‘give anyone 
trouble.” Forceful, zealous, determined as his work shows 
him to be, in the home it was the softer qualities that one 
was aware of rather than his strength. His influence was 
all-pervading, but it was a silent influence. I could wish it 
had been more actively exerted. But he was the scholar 
and kept to his study, and we, his children and my mother, 
never expected him to share fully in our small affairs. We 
spoke of them at table, he knew all that went on, but he never 
really lived our life with us—any more than we entered in 
any full sense into the life he lived with his Hebrew folios. 
The details were too foreign to his interests; but the large 
facts of family unity and affection were, of all things in the 
world, what he most cared for. It was not in my father’s 
nature to be demonstrative; he found it difficult to express 
affection in spoken words. But one was not the less aware 
of hisfeeling. Beneficence and kindness and love emanated 
from him. 

He was ambitious for his children no more than for him- 
self. To fill a useful place in the world, to do as well as one 
could a modest piece of work, to be respected and self- 
respecting, seemed to him all that was worth striving for, and 
he never urged us on, never urged any young person on, to 


60 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


higher place, to positions of power and leadership. Personal 
ambition was not for him one of the high virtues. 

I think it may be said that he did not entirely understand 
people who lived in a very different world from his own. He 
did not realize how intense desires and impulses could be 
that were of a kind he had never known. The moral world 
was a simple one for him, and he would perhaps not have 
conceded that any moral situation was other than simple. 
The only rule was to behave according to the highest 
principles, and there could be no difference of opinion as to 
what these were. He realized persons in their broader out- 
lines only. 

His manners were simple, unaffected, democratic, and he 
ignored many of the small conventions of society. Not 
deliberately, nor in active disapproval of them, but he lived 
above these things, was unaware, in any real sense, that 
they existed. He did not realize, he never could have real- 
ized, of what vast importance the “‘social”’ life is to many, 
even to men of large minds. In this, as in more vital things, 
his reading of human nature was generous. He believed in 
people; he judged them better than they were. I do not 
mean that he deliberately showed his trust in people in 
order to encourage them to deserve it. It was not by an 
act of will that his attitude was one of belief in others; 
I cannot associate with him the thought of anything so 
studied. In a perfectly simple, absolutely genuine way, he 
believed others to be good. I think this was because there 
were no complexities, no subtleties, in his own character. 
Anyone could read him—if not completely, at least with 
certainty so far as the reading went. ‘There were no eva- 
sions, no diplomacies, no pretensions which might deceive. 
What he appeared, the simple-mannered, good, wise man, 
that he was. And so, not knowing in himself what it was 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 61 


to work for power or place, to be “‘tactful”’ for reasons of 
personal ambition (one might as easily think of the prophets 
as ‘“‘tactful’’), it never occurred to him that others might 
act out of motives such as these. 

He was, of course, conscious of malice in the world, not 
through books and newspapers alone, but through actual 
contact with it. Not everyone always was just even to him. 
But disappointing, bitter, as these experiences were (one 
knew it without words), they did little to shake that trust- 
fulness of men which was one of his most characteristic 
qualities. He loved books. To that let it be added that he 
loved and believed in men. Not Man, but men—this 
neighbor, that friend, the child casually met, the servant in 
the house. He was ready to believe that they were all 
well-intentioned, kind, loving, and unselfish. And if now 
and then one betrayed that trust, there was from this no 
slightest effect afterward on his judgment of other men. 

The tendency to think well of people led him on more than 
one occasion to recommend for positions men who had 
begged him to speak a word for them, but who were quite 
unsuited by ordinary tests of personality and adaptability 
to fill the positions to which they aspired. His judgment in 
such cases was affected by pure kindness of heart; one can 
scarcely doubt it. But it is also true that he disregarded 
external characteristics—mannerisms and the like, forgetting 
that the opinion of the world in general depends in no small 
degree on just such elements of personality. 

There was, for instance, Dr. S., a gifted, extremely sensi- 
tive young rabbi, who, along with his excellent qualities, 
possessed certain unfortunate superficial traits which were 
constant obstacles to his real success. But my father, think- 
ing only of his ability and character, helped and encouraged 
him in many ways. Writing a last letter to my father in 


62 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


1885, he says, ‘‘ You, my friend, were the only man that really 
understood me. Your keen eye penetrated the youthful 
countenance and Bohemian manner, and discerned the ear- 
nest enthusiast beneath.” Dr. S. venerated my father, 
using in letter after letter the strongest expressions of devo- 
tion. ‘“‘I would rather lose my right hand than forfeit your 
friendship,” he writes. 

One remembers also in this connection my father’s inter- 
course with Mr. X, a journalist learned in Jewish fields, a 
man of genuine ability, but, to his misfortune, decidedly 
erratic in temperament. He wielded too sharp a pen and 
refused to adapt himself in the slightest degree to the ways 
of others. Failure, or at best a meager uncertain living, was 
his portion. He wrote frequently and fully to my father, 
discussing his affairs, describing his literary projects, etc. 
The most ambitious of these, the writing of a history of the 
Jews in Russia, was suggested by my father. It was carried 
out in part, separate chapters appearing in a secular maga- 
zine, but the book as a whole never appeared. My father 
recognized the weaknesses of Mr. X, even pleaded with 
him for the sake of his future to correct his faults; at 
the same time he respected his fundamental good qualities 
and was a faithful friend to him through many dark years. 
“Tell me my faults,” writes Mr. X. ‘‘I will accept your kind 
advice and believe in your kind disposition and intentions 
toward me; for all in the world I would not have you mis- 
understand me or judge me more harshly than I deserve.” 

Toward incapacity his attitude was one of pure kindness, 
never patronizing nor critical—as if he were not conscious 
of his own superiority. My father’s simplicity of heart kept 
him from such self-knowledge, and therefore men met him 
easily. No one ever felt abashed in his presence. Among 
his visitors were sometimes men with strange hobbies, 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 63 


eccentric persons, self-made failures whom it was impossible 
to help. He listened patiently, kindly, allowing them to 
take his time as suited their desire to unburden themselves; 
it would have seemed unfriendly to have terminated such 
interviews, even the most useless of them, and he was never 
able to do so unaided. 

In practical matters concerning the family welfare it was 
usually my mother who decided what was to be done. ‘This 
was in part because of my father’s slight aptitude for such 
things and his absorption in weightier matters; in part it 
was because my father felt that the home was the wife’s 
kingdom. ‘“‘In this realm,” as we have already read from 
his pen, “‘women may even take the president’s chair, and 
rule by virtue of womanly grace and amiability.”” ‘“‘ You and 
your dear wife,’ he writes to Uncle Henry in 1896, ‘You 
and your dear wife—but no, I ought to say your dear wife 
and you, for good wives should always be given the place 
of honor.” 

He did not undervalue or ignore the practical side of life, 
let it be said. Quite the opposite is the fact. He was 
observant in every way of the small requirements of daily 
living, was prompt and punctual as one in ten thousand. An 
appointment was certain to find him waiting long before the 
time. A business letter was answered literally posthaste. 
Nothing, in fact, irritated him more than carelessness in 
fulfilling the obligations of everyday life. 


My father spent a great deal of time those years in the 
“Twelfth Street neighborhood,” the district in Chicago 
where most of the Russian Jewish population, especially 
the more lately arrived among them, lived together. The 
great influx of Russian Jews to this country began, it will be 
remembered, in 1881, following an outburst of savage 


64 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


persecution on the part of the Russian government. The 
refugees found themselves here among conditions immeasur- 
ably better than those from which they had fled: their lives 
and their little property were safe; the schools were open to 
their children; they could worship in what manner they 
pleased; and they no longer lived in an agony of fear as to 
what terrible event the next week, the next day, the very 
next hour, might bring forth. Yet life in the new strange 
land was not at once wholly pleasant for them, desperately 
poor.as nearly all of them were, and ‘“‘different” (as all 
immigrants are), and orthodox, with an orthodoxy far more 
extreme than was, in general, that of the Jews who had 
preceded them. ‘Thus a situation was created which had 
its economic, its social, and its religious difficulties, and 
which called for the most generous sympathy and help, the 
most tactful behavior, on the part of the older Jewish popula- 
tion of the country. 

My father’s interest in the Jews of Eastern Europe did not 
begin at this time. ‘‘The bond of race’’—‘‘national ver- 
wandtschaftliche Bande’’—the phrase had often occurred in 
his writings. Every Jew, wherever and whatever he was, 
was his brother. ‘‘ Notwithstanding these great differences 
in religious belief we feel ourselves drawn to them; we feel 
in our hearts they are our brothers. It is Israel to whom 
they and we belong.”” And now that Jewish refugees from 
Russia were crowding into Twelfth Street, naturally the 
problems of Twelfth Street absorbed him, mind and heart. 
He consulted with others concerning the immediate economic 
welfare of the unfortunate people; he assisted in organizing 
evening schools; he made friends of their rabbis and leaders. 
He made frequent visits to the school established by the 
B’nai B’rith in 1888, and took a deep personal interest in the 
progress of the individual students. In recognition, they 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 65 


called a society which grew out of this school, The Felsenthal 
Educational Society. He loved to encourage the struggling 
young journalists of the Yiddish and Hebrew press (though, 
in passing, let me say that he deplored the use of Yiddish— 
called it ‘‘an abominable language”). ‘‘He used to come 
into the Courier office,’ says one who remembers those 
early difficult days of Jewish journalism, ‘‘and talk with 
us about what we were trying to do. When Keren Or 
began (a Hebrew monthly), he expected it to accomplish great 
things. He was kind to everyone, sympathized in their per- 
sonal difficulties, did what he could to assist them. He showed 
special interest in anyone with Hebrew learning, and his 
own learning—and this is partly why he was so respected 
and admired by all of us over there—his own Hebrew learn- 
ing was as great as that of the old Polish rabbis.”’ 

Many of these Orthodox rabbis had spent their lives 
within the narrow limits and in the almost mediaeval intel- 
lectual atmosphere of the Russian pale. Their contact with 
modern world culture had been extremely slight, their educa- 
tion had been exclusively in Jewish fields. My father 
understood these men, respected their religious devotion, 
thought of them first of all as brother-Jews, and the differ- 
ence in religious viewpoint formed not the slightest barrier 
to friendly intercourse. On their side, the Orthodox rabbis 
recognized in my father a man of true sympathy. They 
had little patience with “‘ Reform,” but they deeply respected 
and admired and loved this leader of Reform. It was in 
part because he was learned in fields which to them were 
all-important; but chiefly they loved him because he under- 
stood and respected them and met them on terms of absolute 
equality. 

Many proofs they gave him of their confidence. They 
came to our house, sent their friends to him for help, and 


66 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


brought him their intellectual as well as their material 
problems. Some of those who came were pathetically out 
of place in America, equipped with Talmudic learning and 
no other, having no knowledge of trade or business or. 
profession which might be the means of gaining a live- 
lihood—men like the father of Mary Antin, as he is described 
in The Promised Land. Advice on material matters my 
father for obvious reasons was not able to give. He had to 
send his visitors to the organizations which had been created 
in the crisis, and sometimes he sent them to his friends in 
the business world who might possibly find or make a place 
for one more and one more poor untrained Russian immigrant 
in their shops or offices. 

Once or twice he offered in print some general advice of a 
practical kind. In a brief article in a Yiddish paper he set 
forth the necessity of learning English as speedily as possible. 
Another article, in Hebrew, which described first some of the 
conditions of freedom in “this blessed land,” urged parents 
to see to it that their sons learn a trade, their daughters the 
arts of the household, and expressed the hope that many of 
the newcomers would leave the crowded cities and turn to 
agriculture for their daily bread and for peace and enjoy- 
ment of life. 

Other men came who did not need advice on material 
matters, but came to discuss topics of Jewish learning. I 
remember one so Orthodox he refused to shake hands with 
my mother, some ancient law forbidding him to defile him- 
self with the touch of a woman. My father was intellectu- 
ally utterly out of sympathy with these men, but he was 
absolutely tolerant, never for a moment tried to urge his 
views upon them, and found immense pleasure in con- 
versing with them on topics in which they had a common 
interest. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 67 


No better illustration could be given of my father’s 
understanding of those who held Orthodox views than the 
letter which he wrote concerning the policy of a Jewish 
hospital which refused to take into consideration the reli- 
gious practices of its Orthodox patients and provide kosher 
food. He had expressed his opinion before in regard to the 
dietary laws. ‘They belonged, he had said, to a phase in the 
history of Judaism, and there was no need to deplore the 
fact that more and more they were being disregarded and 
forgotten. ‘But there are pious men and women who 
hold to the old customs which to us appear antiquated. Let 
no one be constrained.’’ Now, in this instance of what 
appears to him to be constraint, he speaks of the demoraliz- 
ing effect of “forcible reform,” and of ‘radical fanaticism.” 
“Radical fanaticism (among Jews as among others) says 
to the poor and sick, ‘We will help you, but only on 
the condition that you accept our religious views.’ . . . My 
modest plea is only that a small corner in the hospital 
kitchen be provided for a Jewish cook who will prepare 
kosher food for those who desire it.’? He refers to “the 
longing of the dying Jew to have near him, in his dark 
hour, sympathetic, understanding co-religionists,’’ and urges 
that Jews be included among the staff of the hospital. 
“How unkind, how cruel it would be to deny such com- 
fort to a dying man! Would it indeed be too difficult to 
find ways and means by which these things could be 
arranged ?”’ 

“T close,” he says characteristically, ““begging you to 
believe that it is only sympathy for suffering and needy 
men and women which impels me—after long hesitation— 
to make this plea.’”? 


t Food prepared according to the dietary laws. 
2 A longer extract from this letter is given in Appendix, p. 109. 


68 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


There were many and touching proofs of the affection in 
which my father was held by the Orthodox Jews of Chicago. 
On two great days which stand out in the memory of those 
closest to him, his seventieth and his eightieth birthdays, 
delegations came from Orthodox congregations and societies 
to express their joy and to offer congratulations. They 
sent him flowers; they presented him with resolutions; they 
made him beautiful speeches. As if it happened yesterday, 
I remember the visit, on the afternoon of January 2nd, 1902, 
the day my father was eighty, of a group of gray-haired old 
men who came to tell him how they and their friends de- 
lighted to do him honor. They stood with my father in our 
living-room, while one, their spokesman, came forward and 
made his speech of congratulation in Hebrew. My father 
answered in Hebrew. I remember the sound of the ancient 
language, even more impressive in our home with its new- 
world, twentieth-century look than in the synagogue, the 
patriarchal appearance of the visitors, my father’s happy 
expression, as he stood, vigorous, keen-eyed, listening and 
speaking. I remember the quiet and the dignity of it all. 
To my father, I believe it was one of the very happy moments 
of his life. 


His writings between 1887 and 1897 reflect his various 
interests and include studies, some quite brief, some longer, 
on subjects in Jewish literature, Jewish religious history and 
theology, Jewish problems of the time. Among these last 
there were several articles on “‘authority”’ in Judaism, fore- 
shadowing his later emphatic statements on the synod 
question. Usually he wrote in response to requests from 
editors, or to appeals for information, or on subjects of 
temporary or local importance, in which, however, larger 
principles were involved. In other words, he seldom wrote 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 69 


except under stimulus from without. Thus he used his 
great store of knowledge only incidentally, as in reviews of 
scholarly works of other men. ‘There were two reasons, 
perhaps three, why he did not write such works himself. 
He was too modest, and did not think that the world needed 
books from him. ‘‘Far too much is written,’ he sometimes 
said. ‘Es wird viel zu viel geschrieben.” And he believed 
that work of real value in the field of Jewish science could not 
be produced with the limited materials at his command. In 
Chicago where were the books that he would have needed ?" 
Then, third, he seemed to care most to influence the course 
of events in his time, to do his part in bending Judaism in 
America in this or that direction. He possessed the intensest 
interest in the actualities of the present in his religious world, 
and, as he conceived it, his duty was, not to pore over books 
of the past, or to write books dealing with the past, for the 
love of history or of science, but to assist in solving problems 
of the present, bringing his learning to bear, however, when 
there was occasion, upon these problems. He left, therefore, 
no lengthy work of scholarship. Skilled as he was in com- 
bining simplicity and readableness with learning, one cannot 
but regret the books that did not come from his pen. One 
cannot but regret that he experienced the scholar’s satisfac- 
tions in far too limited a way. 

It was characteristic of him that the large majority of 
his writings were addressed to the layman, and that he wrote 
simply and without any attempt at literary effect. ‘Rabbi 
Patrick,” ““How Old Is ‘ Lekhah Dodi’ ?” and the series called 
“Literary Miscellanies,’’ which ran in the Menorah Monthly 
from May to October, 1887, are particularly striking 
examples of informal treatment of subjects easily capable 
of being treated in dry-as-dust fashion. 


t Cf. Introduction to “Zur Bibel und Grammatik.” Bibliog. 267. 


70 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


The kind of simplicity which marks his writing is some- 
thing different from ordinary clearness. It was not that he 
felt it a duty to adapt his style to the mental processes of 
those who were to read or listen to him, though it would have 
been in harmony with his character so to do had his natural 
style been involved or difficult: he wrote as he did because 
he best expressed himself so. His power is not the power of 
suggestion, but the power that comes from sympathy—from 
likeness rather—with the average mind. ‘There was, it may 
be said, almost the quality of naiveté in his writing, as if 
indeed he were unaware, as perhaps it was temperamentally 
impossible for him to be otherwise than unaware, that all 
men were not simple-hearted, unaffected as himself. 


My father’s historical interest was always marked. He 
had been in Chicago only five years when he read a paper 
before the Chicago Historical Society on ‘‘The Israelites of 
Chicago.”” Once he remarked, in a letter to Einhorn, that 
philosophical speculation interested him far less than the 
history of philosophy. The general fact is quite evident from 
his writings, in which, as I have already said, there is brought 
to bear upon the discussion of modern problems a broad and 
deep knowledge of historical facts and a clear understanding 
of their significance. 

The first suggestion for the founding of the American 
Jewish Historical Society came from him, in a letter 
addressed to Dr. Cyrus Adler in 1888, and from the time 
it was established in 1892 he was active in furthering its 
aims. He contributed a few papers to its Publications; he 
served as a member of its Executive Council and for many 
years as one of its vice-presidents; he suggested subjects for 
research. A letter to Professor Richard Gottheil, dated 
May 18, 1898, contains the following passage: 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 71 


You wrote me some friendly words a few weeks ago in regard to 
my historical monograph, The Beginnings of the Chicago Sinai Congre- 
gation. For this accept my very cordial thanks. Let me now makea 
suggestion. You are a member of the Executive Council of the 
A.J.H.S. You and the other members of the Executive Council 
should, in my opinion, arrange to have similar monographs written 
by competent persons on other subjects in American Jewish history. 
For instance: in the 1820’s there was a decided tendency toward 
Reform in the congregation Beth El in Charleston, S.C. To discover 
its origin and trace its history is more difficult today than it was even 
twelve or fifteen years ago. Is there not all the more reason then 
for the governing board of the Historical Society to commission some 
one in Charleston to set down in the interest of history the facts 
concerning those early manifestations of Reform in Charleston ? 

Another example: Toward the close of the sixties, Maimonides 
College was founded in Philadelphia. It existed two or three years. 
The history of this undertaking should now be written, and could, 
as I believe, be written at this time without the least prejudice. 
The occasion of its founding, the incidents of its career, the reasons 
why it ceased to exist should all be studied and the facts set 
forth. 

A comprehensive article might be written on the history of the 
benevolent institutions in the city of New York in the nineteenth 
century. In separate monographs might also be treated Mt. Sinai 
Hospital, the Orphan Asylum, the Old People’s Home in Yonkers, the 
United Hebrew Charities, etc. 

Still to be written are also the biographies of certain American Jews 
who after all fill a very different place in history from, let us say, Col. 
Is. Franks or Major D. S. Franks, about whom articles appeared in 
the latest volume of Publications of the A.J.H.S. Have these men been 
of the slightest importance in the history of Jews and of Judaism in 
America? Erase their names and it will make no difference on the 
pages of history. They have passed, leaving no mark. It is quite 
another case with Isaac Leeser, with Samuel Isaacs, M. J. Raphall, 
L. Merzbacher, and S. Adler; with Abraham Reis of Baltimore; and 
with various others who were active in this country during the first 
half of the century. At all events, the art of biography would have 
worthy subjects in these men. And for Emma Lazarus who has now 


72 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


been resting in her grave for ten years and more our Historical Society 
ought to provide a biographical memorial. 

Another field for historical research lies in the bibliography of 
American Judaica and Hebraica. 

Equally great was my father’s interest in the Jewish 
Publication Society, which was founded in 1888. He was a 
member of its Publication Committee from the beginning 
until his death in 1908, and during all but the last of this 
period he read manuscripts and gave counsel from a distance 
in wise and genial fashion. 


He took part, in 1890, in a conference between Jews and 
Christians arranged by Mr. William E. Blackstone, a resident 
of Chicago who was more or less active in efforts to 
“enlighten” the Jews religiously. A little blue-covered peri- 
odical, called The Peculiar People, sponsored by him, came 
to our house pretty regularly for a while, and Mr. Blackstone 
himself came sometimes to visit my father—not, I am sure, 
expecting to convert him, but to discuss questions of creed. 
My father met him in friendly spirit, recognizing his sincer- 
ity and respecting the frank and courteous manner of his 
approach. As to conferences between men of opposite faith, 
my father believed them quite useless; they were likely to 
create misunderstanding and ill-feeling. However, this 
conference once organized, he could not refuse to take part 
in it and spoke with entire frankness on the subject, ‘“‘ Why 
the Jews Do Not Accept Jesus as the Messiah.” Even 
before this he had on one or two occasions discussed the 
dogmas of orthodox Christianity. But, as I have suggested, 
he never did this from choice, and at one time, in a contro- 
versy with Professor Franz Delitzsch, he made a statement 
as to the occasions when discussion of or comment on other 
creeds is proper.t A comparison of dogmas is sometimes not 


* Cf. “Professor Delitzsch iiber interconfessionelles Verhalten.” Bibliog. 172. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 73 


to be avoided, he said; a teacher or a representative of a 
particular religion is sometimes obliged to criticize the 
intimate religious opinions of others, but such occasions occur 
only rarely. 

He understood by orthodox Christianity, of course, the 
religion of Paul, and he drew the distinction between this 
and the religion of Jesus, which, he pointed out, was identi- 
cal with the Jewish religion. He believed there were many 
Christians who retained their connection with orthodox 
churches and were counted among the orthodox who yet 
were liberals at heart. Others ‘“‘believed that they be- 
lieved’”’; this was a phrase of his. But whatever the reli- 
gion of other men it deserved respect if sincerely professed. 
Tolerance was for him a high religious duty, and he was 
intolerant only of intolerance. 

As to the division of the human race into “believers” 
and “‘non-believers,” this had wrought infinitely more harm 
than the division into separate nations which was considered 
by some so deplorable. 

To Christianity my father gave the credit for bringing 
into the consciousness of the world the sublime idea of the 
oneness of humanity first expressed by the prophets of 
Israel. ‘‘But while accomplishing this,” he said, “the unfor- 
tunate admixture, from foreign sources, of mystic and super- 
stitious dogmas occurred.” 


VI 


ACTIVITY FOR ZIONISM 
1897-1908 


WE moved to the South Side in 1897. My father was 
then seventy-five, but strong as he had ever been both 
mentally and physically, and it was with the enthusiasm 
almost of youth that he threw himself into the movement 
in Israel which had its modern beginnings about this time. 
His first public expression on Zionism is to be found in a 
letter written in May, 1897. His last published word on 
any subject is in part on Zionism. It was his final, and 
during these last ten years of his life, his most absorbing 
interest. 

My father has himself dated his Zionist activity from 
1897. A letter written in 1905 to Dr. J. L. Magnes, then 
secretary of the Federation of American Zionists, contains 
this passage: 

I do not know whether you are aware of the fact that I really 
was the very first one among the non-Polish American Jews who came 
publicly forward as an advocate of Zionism. Several months prior to 
the first Basle Congress, the American Hebrew in its issue of May 7, 
1897, published a letter from me, in which I strongly called upon 
American congregations and societies to send delegates to the Congress, 
and in the months following I defended the stand I took in a number of 
articles in the American Hebrew, the Jewish Exponent, etc. Should 
you ever publish in the Maccabean or elsewhere a few historical docu- 
ments bearing on the subject, my first article, I think, should have a 
place among them. Iam really proud to think that I was the Zionist 
avant-garde among non-Russian Jews in this country. 

It was the one time in his life, I believe, that he expressed 
pride in anything he had done or thought. 
74 


- 
— a a! -_ 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 75 


My father gives 1897 as the date of his first Zionist article, 
but evidence is clear that he was predisposed toward Zion- 
ism long before 1897, even long before the movement can 
be said to have existed. I do not refer to his life-long 
convictions of Jewish racial unity, but to his definite expres- 
sions in regard to colonization in Palestine which appeared, 
one article in 1891, another in 1893.1 Modern political 
Zionism dates from 1894, it will be remembered, the year of 
publication of Herzl’s Judenstaat (The Jewish State). My 
father’s articles on Palestinian colonization contain exactly 
the same ideas that he expressed over and over again in his 
later definitely Zionistic writings. He touches on the phil- 
anthropic, the political, and the religious aspects of the 
problem, saying (the passage is taken from his 1891 article): 


What the political status of those Jews would be [in a colonized 
Palestine]? What the religious aspects of the future Judaism in 
“the Holy Land” would be? What would the future be? My dear 
sir, I do not play any Zukunftsmusik; I have no desire to indulge in 
any speculative political Kannegtesserei; I leave this for the present 
to the diplomats of Europe, who, I trust, will at an early day meet in 
the international conference asked for, and I confide in the natural 
historical development of events. With me, this Jewish question is 
at the present time a philanthropic question and nothing else. Mil- 
lions of oppressed Jewish brethren appeal: “Help us! Assist us!” 
and we listen compassionately to this appeal, and it is our duty to help 
and assist. 

To entertain an opposing position to the movement on religious 
grounds and because of the attempts that will be undoubtedly made 
to restore the ancient Mosaic institutions . . . seems to me to be 
wrong and cruel and illiberal. Not all the Jews will return to Pal- 
estine; none will be compelled to go and live there. The American 
Jews, the German Jews, the French Jews, and other Jews will, I hope, 
be permitted to live where they are. . . . They will solve their reli- 
gious problems as suits them; let the Palestinian Jews do the same. 


« Cf. “The Palestine Memorial,” Bibliog. 236, and ‘‘The Palestine Question,” 
Bibliog. 244. 


76 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


It is interesting to remember in this connection that, in 
earlier days he had sometimes spoken with a touch of scorn 
of the paldstinensischer Jude, having in mind, however, those 
who set before everything else, as the main desideratum, the 
restoration of the old Zion with all its laws and customs of 
a long-departed age. 

After 1897 my father could scarcely write of any other 
subject than Zionism. Herzl and Nordau had succeeded 
in making the establishment of a Jewish state an actual 
possibility. Zionism had become the most vital problem 
before the Jewish world, and men began to range them- 
selves on one side or the other. The Reform rabbis, with 
very few exceptions, were anti-Zionists. My father’s opin- 
ions were received by his colleagues with surprise. They 
accused him—vehemently they accused him—of disloyalty 
to his early convictions in regard to the universal character 
of Judaism and to the Jewish “mission” to uphold mono- 
theism in the world. He denied that he was disloyal, 
denied that there was any incompatibility between 
‘Reform’? and Zionism. I heard him say in so many 
words, answering someone’s question, ‘‘When did your 
views begin to change ?” (it was in Wilmette, in 1907; he 
looked for the moment a little stern), ‘“‘I have never 
changed.”” And when one remembers the strength of his 
attachment to the people of Israel, the intense nationalism, 
both latent and expressed, in his writings from the very 
beginning, his enthusiastic advocacy of Zionism cannot but 
appear entirely logical. It is true, in the days of his activity 
for Reform, in the fifties and sixties and seventies, he had 
taught that it was for the Jewish people to rejoice and not 
to mourn that they had been dispersed among the nations, 
since through the dispersion they had been enabled to become 
a blessing to the world and might in the future continue to 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL a7 


be a blessing. But if his views on this one point, the “‘mis- 
sion”’ of Israel, were to some extent modified, this modifica- 
tion did not amount to the complete reversal of opinion 
which was ascribed to him by his opponents. The Jews 
still had a mission, had still their contribution to make 
toward the building of the ‘‘Grand Temple of Humanity,’” in 
which words my father expressed his final conception of 
Israel’s mission, but it was not necessary for them to remain 
scattered and dispersed in order to fulfil this mission. 
‘“A small and well organized nation can work more effi- 
caciously for good than many millions scattered and dis- 
organized,” he wrote. Between Zionism and a mission thus 
redefined there is no conflict. As for the mission idea as 
conceived and ardently promulgated by the great Reform 
leaders of the past, would they not, he asks, all today 
acknowledge, in consequence of Zionism, that it was a 
mistaken idea, and one that should be revised? He listens 
to an imaginary conversation, Geiger, Einhorn, Wechsler, 
Hirsch, and others talking in Paradise, hears them agree that 
Zionism has changed everything, and through words which 
he puts into their mouths explains to us his own altered views. 
Altered, as I have said, in this one respect only: the preten- 
tious ‘‘mission”’ of former times, that ‘‘mission”’ which the 
Reform rabbis continued to preach, he held up almost to 
scorn; the Jewish mission, as he finally conceived it, was 
simply to work, as one nation among many, to further the 
ends of humanity. 

On his side my father did not understand how others 
could remain apart from the movement. The vast majority 
of the Jews of the world were living under frightful conditions 
in Eastern Europe, were persecuted and miserable. Was it 


1Cf. “Jewish Weltanschauung, Israel’s Mission, and Kindred Conceptions.” 
Bibliog. 302. 


78 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


not for the few who were free and happy in Western countries 
to join in an effort which promised to save them? With 
Zionism in mind, he wrote in 1901": 

Und Diejenigen, die in ihrem grenzenlosen Jammer uns um Hiilfe 
anflehen, sind unsere Briider, unsere Stammesgenossen! Und da 
merkwiirdiger Weise noch immer viele eine klare naturgeschichtliche 
und geschichtliche Thatsache ableugnen wollen, und sich gegen die 
Stammesgenossenschaft wehren, so wollen wir ihnen zu liebe sagen: 
Es sind Millionen unserer Glaubensgenossen, die sich in unsagbarer 
Bedrangniss befinden. Es sind Millionen von Juden in Russland, in 
Ruininien und anderswo, welche von Ausrottung und Vernichtung 
bedroht und dem Untergange verfallen sind—nicht bloss dem leib- 
lichen, sondern auch dem geistigen, dem sittlichen, dem religidsen 
Niedergang—wenn nicht bald Hiilfe kommt. O helfet, rettet, siumet 
nicht! 

(And they who in their boundless misery implore us for help are 
our brothers! ‘They are flesh of our flesh! But since, curiously 
enough, there are still many who deny the obvious fact, the scientific 
and historical fact, of our blood relationship, let us, on their account, 
use other words: There are millions of our coreligionists who are living 
under unspeakable conditions of oppression. ‘There are millions of 
Jews in Russia, in Roumania, and in other countries, who are threat- 
ened with extermination, with annihilation, with ruin—who will be 
destroyed not only physically, but also spiritually, morally, religiously 
—if help does not come soon. O help them! save them! do not 
delay!) 

In other places he said in effect, ‘‘Must this martyrdom 
continue in order that the great truths of our religion be 
preserved? ‘These truths are the possession of the world. 
We as individual Jews have no special message to deliver 
to mankind. From Palestine, from a Jewish Musterstaat, 
our so-called ‘mission’ can best be fulfilled.” 

Thus in article after article. And he had the strong faith 
that those who opposed the movement now and who 
reproached him for his ardent advocacy of it would them- 


™ Cf. “Ueber Antisemitismus und Verwandtes.” Bibliog. 295. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 79 


selves be won over in the course of time. ‘Alle, Alle werden 
Zionisten,” he predicted, and when, later, there began to be 
a noticeable wavering among the anti-Zionists and first a 
few and then others, finding there was no incompatibility 
between Reform and Zionism, declared their changed 
opinions, he wrote rejoicingly of the fact. 

In addition to his writing, my father served the Zionist 
cause in practical ways asa member of the Actions Comité of 
the World Zionist Congress, as the international organiza- 
tion was at first called, as vice-president of the Federation of 
American Zionists, and as adviser to its Executive Com- 
mittee. In Chicago he was a member of a local Zionist 
Society, and even in his eighties attended meetings and made 
addresses with all the fervor of youth. His fellow-Zionists 
appreciated his counsel, reverenced him for his wisdom and 
ardent enthusiasm, and loved to do him honor. A letter 
from Professor Gottheil, written in 1899, reads in part as 
follows: 


My VERY DEAR DocToR FELSENTHAL: 


I have your note of September 27th, and say quite openly that I 
would never think of putting another man, no matter how young he 
might be, in your place. If I am not mistaken, it is quite un-Jewish 
to prefer young men in place of older and experienced ones. We can- 
not do without the support of your counsel, and of your name, and 
you will excuse me being so rough as to refuse absolutely to entertain 
for one single moment your request. I know how much you would 
like to be present at our meetings. If you cannot, let us at least feel 
that you are with us in spirit, and am sure that that feeling will enable 
us to find the proper counsel.in those affairs which shall busy us. 


A few years after this, in 1906, when he had for the third 
time been elected honorary vice-president of the Federation 
of American Zionists and felt himself in truth physically 
unable to be of service, he wrote sadly to Dr. Magnes, who 
was secretary at the time: 


80 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


I feel my inability to do anything, by word or otherwise, for our 
cause the more keenly, as my enthusiasm for the same and my con- 
viction that the aims of Zionism and the methods it pursues are the 
only ones which will bring a durable salvation to Israel, are as alive 
within me as they ever were. Alas! It is sad to be such a poor 
invalid as I am. 


Dr. Magnes replied: 


Your letter telling us the reasons for your forced inactivity in the 
Zionist movement made a very deep impression upon me as it did 
upon those who had the honor of reading your letter. We have all 
been aware, much to our sorrow, that your advanced age has not 
permitted you to do that which your mind and heart have prompted 
you to do. But we have also known—and your letter is but an 
additional proof of this—that you still take fire at the thought of 
oon mow o9 os mann (‘the revival of the nation in the land 
of the nation’’]. We younger men need the courage such a life as 
yours can inspire within us. 


‘‘ Jiidische Thesen,’’ which appeared in 1901, makes no 
direct allusion to Zionism, nevertheless it may be considered 
my father’s most important contribution to the movement. 
At all events its significance was immediately recognized by 
Zionists; it was translated and published under the title 
‘“‘Fundamental Principles of Judaism,” in the Maccabaean, a 
Zionist monthly, and there characterized as ‘‘one of the most 
cogent, clear, and concise statements of the principles under- 
lying the Zionist movement that has appeared in some time. 
The propositions discussed by Dr. Felsenthal form the 
philosophical basis upon which the Zionists must build the 
Jewish state.” Reprinted in its original German in a 
collection of papers published in Berlin in 1903, its clarity 
and force were commented upon by one writing in the 
Revue des études juives: “Il fait véritablement plaisir de 
voir un homme de quatre-vingt-un ans combattre avec une 
pareille ardeur juvénile pour ses idées.” (“It is truly 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 81 


refreshing to see a man of eighty-one defend his ideas with 
such youthful ardor.’’) 

Even here, in this calm, logical, systematic series of 
statements, the reviewer discerns the passionate feeling 
underneath. My father spoke of himself once as phleg- 
matic. “Ich befinde mich schon lange in einem ziemlich 
vorgertickten Alter, in welchem leidenschaftliche Erregungen 
nur selten zum Vorschein kommen. Ueberdies war ich 
mein ganzes Leben lang von Natur aus ein arger Phlegma- 
tikus. Dennoch aber gibt es zuweilen Veranlassun- 
gen... 7% (‘I arrived a good while ago at a period in 
life when one is seldom disturbed by passionate feeling. 
Besides, I am by nature an extremely phlegmatic ‘person. 
I have always been so. Nevertheless, there are occa- 
sions ...”) He maligned himself. Phlegmatic? No. 
Controlled and calm? Yes. The equanimity of the old 
began with him in his youth; that is true. But the zest of 
youth lasted on to his old age. | 

There are passages in his correspondence which illustrate 
better perhaps than anything in his formal papers the 
intensity of his enthusiasm for Zionism. To Professor 
Gottheil he wrote in 1898 the following letter. It is the same 
from which his remarks on the work of the Historical Society 
have been quoted. 


My DEAR DOCTOR: 


As a consequence of this unholy war into which our country has 
been driven by unprincipled newspapers and unprincipled men, we are 
living in these days in the midst of unspeakable noise and confusion. 
Some are impelled to seek refuge from these conditions in books, in 
nature, in intercourse with friends who have known how to remain 
calm and composed. JI too feel at times the longing for peace and 
quiet. You will not take it amiss, then, my dear professor, if I seek 


t Cf. “‘Ueber Antisemitismus und Verwandtes.”’ Bibliog. 295. 


82 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


forgetfulness in your company for a quarter of an hour, and chat with 
you about one thing and another ? 

Under present circumstances, Zionist activity in America will 
naturally be greatly hindered. Nevertheless let us hope that America 
will be represented at the second Basle Congress by a good number of 
delegates, men of standing and influence. Now who are the men who 
should be elected delegates? ‘There is no need to mention names—you 
at all events must be one of them—and you must bring your weighty 
influence to bear upon the selection of the others. I myself am unfor- 
tunately too advanced in age; else I should, spite of my ingrained 
shyness, come joyfully to the front, and to the question MOWN "2 MN 
"25 apr ™3° [Whom shall I send and who will go for me ?”’] answer 
in the words of the youthful Isaiah, "275w 7257 [Here am I; send 
me.”’]. But alas, I can no longer play an active part, least of all in 
CHissiield we 

Those high-minded and generous-hearted enthusiasts whom you 
will see in Basle—extend my greetings to them, and tell them that on 
the shore of distant Lake Michigan there is an old man who longs 
for the blessed fulfilment of their hopes. ‘‘ Dreamers of the Ghetto” 
Zangwill has called them; them also. Would to God we had many 
thousands of such dreamers! The world needs them, in this domain 
and in many others. What would have become of humanity, what 
will become of humanity, without dreamers such as these? 


I take the following paragraph from a letter addressed 
to a Zionist society in Chicago: 


Dear friends, it is a high and holy cause in the service of which you 
are enrolled. ‘This cause is directed toward the emancipation of our 
brothers, our brothers both in blood and in faith, from unspeakable 
misery, and the recovery of a homeland, our own ancient homeland, 
for persecuted and suffering Israel. O do not grow weary, do not 
lose courage, let nothing diminish your enthusiasm for this cause. 
Already it has fired the hearts of myriads of our brothers in all parts 
of the world. Is not this alone success enough? Is it not wonderful 
to see how, through Zionism, glorious hopes have been kindled and 
many many hearts inspired and characters ennobled? Truly, 
friends, we have the right to say 7>N DD FINN Ww yy "D8 (“Happy 
the eye that beheld all this!’’| 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 83 


Finally, in a letter to Dr. Magnes, under date of March 4, 
1907, 1s to be found this: 

Did the Board.of Officers of the F.A.Z. ever discuss the matter of 
bringing in an efficient way the Great Jewish Question—in regard to 
its importance and to its wide-reaching extension, the greatest Jewish 
Question in all Jewish history since the downfall of the Jewish Com- 
monwealth in the year ’70—before the approaching Peace Congress at 
the Hague? If not, I would suggest that you, dear Doctor, would 
cause the question to be discussed before the very next meeting of 
the Board, and would urge the speedy passing of proper resolutions. 
Let the American Federation enter into correspondence with the 
Great Actions Comité, and conjointly with them and other Federa- 
tions let it prepare a Memorial to be officially laid before the Hague 
Congress and let a special Committee of Three—the chairman of which 
must of course be Dr. Nordau—be appointed, who are to proceed to 
the Hague, to stay there while the Congress is in session, and to use 
there all the proper means for the realization of the end which you and 
I and the hundreds of thousands of our Zionistic Gesinnungsgenossen 
are longing and acting for. . . . If the present opportunity for taking 
steps in a world-historic movement is neglected—who knows when 
again such an opportunity will offer itself? Therefore act! act!! act!!! 

From day to day my conviction becomes more intensified that 
Zionism alone will be the savior of our nation and its religion, and 
save it from death and disappearance. I know that the anti-Zionists, 
and especially those in the so-called Reform camp, do not share in this 
view; they—the ‘‘ Dreamers’’—believe that by their ‘‘reforms” they 
will save Israel, and that thereby they will empower it to fulfill what 
they call the Jewish Mission in the world! Just in the opposite direc- 
tion their endeavors will run. Absorption of Israel by other nations 
and gradual dying of Judaism, this will be their achievement. 

I often thought in these last days of a certain passage in the 
Talmud (in Tr. Sanhedrin), wherein, in connection with the Biblical 
verse, 722 4979 mame [And thou shalt love thy neighbor as 
thyself”’], it is said, MB” MV 1D AMD [‘Select for him a beautiful 
form of death’’]. A beautiful death, euthanasia, is in certain circum- 
stances something highly desirable. But to bring it about in regard 
to the people of Israel—no, I do not wish to be an accomplice in such 
a criminal proceeding. 


84 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


When Herzl died in 1904 there was mourning in the 
hearts of Zionists all over the world. In Chicago a funeral 
procession marched several miles through the streets of 
the Jewish district, escorting an empty carriage. My 
father was one of the silent marchers. 


VII 


LAST YEARS 
1897-1908 


THE chief joy of my father’s last ten or twelve years was 
his grandfatherhood. His face was radiant when he looked 
at the children. He played with them—dquiet games with 
pencil and paper—told them stories, wrote them loving 
letters, mingling good advice with his expressions of affec- 
tion, and always exalting the simpler virtues. This is to 
a two-year-old: 

DEAR LITTLE HELEN: 


What do you think, Helen—there is a man in Chicago who, since 
you left our city, daily, hourly thinks of you, though he does not 
much speak of you! ‘This is one of his habits to be silent. He has 
the idea that silence is a virtue. And do you know who that man is? 
Now try to guess it. Well, you can guess it right away. “That’s 
my grandpa!” you will exclaim and you are correct. It is your 
grandpa who early in the morning and late in the evening and even 
during the night, when he has his sleepless hours, thinks of you and— 
chats with you, as well as such is possible in your absence. Now tell 
me candidly, Do you also think of your grandpa, or have you forgotten 
him? No, you have not forgotten him; I know it. So weak your 
memory is not. 

How do you spend your time? I suppose with your dollies, your 
picture books, your balls, your tops, and so forth; but mainly with 
your mamma and papa; principally. with yourmamma, I think. For 
she is constantly with you and near you, while papa is attending to 
his business. 

Many kisses, dear little Helen! Give my regards to your parents! 
Kiss them for a ‘‘Good Morning” and a “Good Night,” and say, 
That’s for me. And then give them some more kisses and say, 
That’s for Grandpa. And if you will continue, neither your papa nor 
your mamma will object. 

Goodbye, dear Helen! 

Your Grandpa 


85 


B. FELSENTHAL 


86 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


This to Helen at five: 


Helen, do you still remember the stories which Grandpa used to 
tell you about Little Red Ridinghood, Struwel-Peter, Beebla-Baabla, 
and the Good Boy and the Bad Boy, and so forth? Well, Helen, I 
think, when the next time you come here, I may have some new stories 
to entertain you with, and soon brother Lawrence may participate in 
listening to Grandpa’s fairy-tales. 


On a seventh birthday: 


My dear and good and sweet Helen, I congratulate you.... I 
wish—nay, I know that in the next year, as in the previous one, you 
will be a good and lovely child, an obedient daughter to your dear 
papa and mamma, a loving sister to Laurie, an attentive pupil to 
your good teacher, a beloved friend to the other children in the school 
and in the neighborhood... . 


Later in the year: 


DEAR HELEN: 


It is so very kind of you to send me regularly every week a letter. 
I am very much delighted to read them. It is a pleasure to me to 
notice that you progress finely in your studies. For I think that 
your letters become nicer and better every week. 

The art of letter-writing—I must stop here, for in my mind I hear 
you interrupting me and remarking: “‘Grandpa, you say ‘the art of 
letter-writing.’ But is it really an art ?” 

Yes, dear Helen, I believe it is. Some people will never succeed 
in mastering the art of writing a really beautiful letter. What they 
call “‘letters’’ is in comparison with truly good letters, not more than 
an ugly painting, the work of an unskilled common artisan, would be 
in comparison with a painting of a grand master. 

How can we learn this art? In my opinion, the main rule is: Fill 
your mind with good and correct thoughts and your soul with good 
and noble sentiments, and then sit down and write. Write just as 
you please. Your letter will turn out to bea good one. The contents 
will be beautiful, and the writer will prove that there is within him, or 
within her, a beautiful soul. And that is the main thing. 

Of course, the words must all be correctly spelled, and the gram- 
matical rules must all be observed. Furthermore, the penmanship 
must be nice and clean, neat and orderly. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 87 . 


Before you commence to write a sentence, think it out to the end 
in your mind and then write it down, word by word, just as you have 
formed it in your mind. 

But I will not longer detain you with an essay on letter-writing. 
When you are somewhat older, then we may again discuss the subject. 
However, I shall not make any firm promises. . . . 

Hoping that you will enjoy good health and that you will grow 
up not only bodily, but also in the beauty of your heart and soul, and 
that you will win the love of all the good people in your town, 

I remain, my dear and beloved child, 


Your grandfather 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


In answer to a child’s scrawl. It was before Lawrence could 
write: 


DEAR LAWRENCE: 


You have written a very nice letter to me, your grandfather, and 
I was very much delighted in reading it. Not everyone in the house 
was able to read it. But I could. Now I will tell you how I read it, 
and you will tell me afterwards whether I read it correctly. You 
wrote as follows: | 

“Dear grandpa, I love you, I love you very much. I hope that 
you are not sick any more. When the next time I come to Chicago, 
you and I go together to Washington Park, and there we shall see the 
fine flowers and the thousands of trees and bushes, and the little fish 
swimming in the ponds, and we shall listen to the birds singing in the 
air. Will this not be fine, grandpa? And when we go home, you will 
say, Now, Lawrence, I shall buy you some candy. But I will answer, 
Do not buy for me candy—lI do not like candy—lI will rather have 
peanuts or popcorn. Grandpa, will this not be very nice? Grandpa, 
I repeat it: I love you very much. JI am your grandson, 

LAWRENCE” 


This was your letter, and in this way did I read it. Did I makea 
mistake ? 

I have not much more to say today. Only this I will add: Kiss 
your papa, and kiss your mamma, and kiss your sister, and tell them 


88 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


that grandpa has said that you should do this, and that you have to 
mind your grandpa. Remain a good boy, and then you will grow 
up and become a good man. 

Your grandfather 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


His letters to others of his family, to nephews and nieces, 
and to his children, were like these in the affection they 
expressed, the interest they showed in what the young people 
were doing, the advice they contained as to conduct and 
character. 

His letters encouraged as well as admonished. It was 
easier for him to write words of praise than to speak them. 
“You endeavor to fill your place in the world becomingly,”’ 
he wrote to a girl of nineteen, and quoted Heine, ‘‘ Mir ist 
als ob ich die Hande .. .” 

It was during these years that he carried on the corre- 
spondence with his niece in Germany that gave him so much 
pleasure. One of these letters has been placed at the begin- 
ning of this sketch. The two which follow were both 
written in 1905. 


My DEAR NIECE: 


Considerable time has passed since I last wrote you. But you 
will be quite mistaken if you conclude from the infrequency of my 
letters that my love and friendship for you have diminished. Rest 
assured—my dear friends in the old far-distant homeland are always 
present tomy mind; and many an hour when I sit solitary in my study, 
or on sleepless nights, when my thoughts wander hither and thither, 
my soul is filled with thoughts of all of you, my beloved friends in far- 
away Germany... . 

I have just this moment re-read your letter of September 1st, and 
have found your lively and warm-hearted and unaffected talk most 
refreshing. With God’s help, may you remain cheerful and bright- 
spirited for a long long time—yes, your whole life long. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 89 


A joyous disposition has its source in a heart which is pure and 
innocent and good. A pure and innocent heart—that, after all, is a 
possession whose worth transcends all else. An ever pure and child- 
like and innocent-heart, an ever bright and happy nature—where in 
the world is anything lovelier to be found? And because IJ set so high 
a value on the qualities of the heart, I rank above every other kind of 
education the education of the heart! There are few words so widely 
misunderstood, so falsely applied as the word education. Whom does 
the world not call “educated”! Whoever knows how to use the 
phrases current in so-called “society”’ (phrases frequently so empty of 
meaning) is an ‘‘educated”’ person. But I do not hesitate to maintain 
that without cultivation of the spirit this other is no more than mere 
semblance, hollow appearance, thin veneer. And when one removes 
this veneer, what is to be seen? Cultivation of the spirit is worth 
more than intellectual culture, more than aesthetic culture, more than 
external refinement, more than acquaintance with the niceties of 
social intercourse. 

I am glad to see from your letter that you spend many a Sunday 
afternoon in the public library and the city museum. In reading 
great works of literature, in associating with great poets and thinkers 
of the past, the mind expands, and thoughts and feelings arise within 
us, often echoing long, long after, which may influence our whole 
being for good, ennoble our character, guide our lives. It is the same 
when we contemplate great masterpieces of painting or of sculpture. 
Then too we feel ourselves lifted up to the heights, to regions of 
spiritual purity. However, he who is wise will not wish to live, nor 
will he be able to live, constantly on this high spiritual plane. Con- 
stantly? No, that is impossible. Our everyday life makes its 
demands, requires us to fulfill the duties which it lays upon us. One 
returns to these duties with renewed desire, with renewed strength, 
one does the day’s task with greater joy and contentment after spend-. 
ing some blessed hours in the company of Schiller and Goethe, of 
Raphael and Michael Angelo. .. . 

And now farewell, you dear “Frankfurter Madel,” as you 
have called yourself in your letter. Farewell, you golden Frank- 
furter Miadel.” Wait! One thing I have to ask you. When he 
comes, the prince from fairyland who will find his lovely princess in 
you, the ‘Frankfurter Madel,”’ into whose beaming eyes and golden 


go BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


heart he will look, and whose hand he will take, and to whom he will 
say—well, I will stop here. I will leave you to guess what I was about 
to write. But when it happens, Berthachen, my dear, you will let me 
know all about it—will you not? 


This other is in a different vein. 
My DEAR NIECE BERTHA: 


. . . Most cordial thanks for the photographs. They are beau- 
tiful—most beautiful. How dear and lovely the original must be! 
Looking long at them there came into my mind the first line of a 
familiar poem of Heine’s: “‘Du hast ja die schénsten Augen.” ‘The 
remaining lines, to be sure, do not apply so well. But what of that? 
The eyes are beautiful. And they do not only look outward, they 
reflect also the soul within; disclosing to him who looks into their 
depths a pure and innocent heart, an active mind which yet is peaceful 
and serene. Yes, the beautiful eyes, and the beautiful soul and heart 
of which they tell, are more precious than diamonds and pearls. 

In your last letter you have expressed yourself most enthusiasti- 
cally in regard to Wagner’s operas. Tannhduser in particular has lifted 
you up out of the prose of everyday life. You can scarcely find words 
to describe its inspiring effect upon you. Music is indeed a high and 
holy art, always provided it is used in the service of the truly beauti- 
ful, the sublime and elevating, and does not cater to the vulgar taste 
of the uncultivated, provided it sanctifies and inspires and elevates, 
and does not drag one down into the dust and dirt. This applies, of 
course, to every form of art, to poetry and rhetoric, to painting and 
sculpture. Art, true art, has contributed enormously to the advance 
of mankind, to its higher spiritual development. Art has been a factor 
in history whose importance can not be overestimated. But this is 
true, I repeat, only of genuine art, and not of that which merely displays 
the external forms of art. A rhymester expressing his prosaic ideas 
in rough, or even in smooth verse, is far from being a poet. Anda 
mere color-mixer, painting wooden figures and lifeless scenes in a 
lifeless way is far from being a true painter. It is the same with music. 
Tn this sphere also we have art and its imitation; noble and cultivated 
taste on the one hand, coarse vulgarity on the other; the power to 
elevate and the power to degrade; a purifying influence and a debasing 
force. Now I have not the least doubt that Wagner is to be counted 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL QI 


among the true artists; nor that he has even been a pioneer of a new 
form of music which is winning for itself more and more cordial 
recognition and daily widening its influence. But I myself do not 
pretend to have any judgment in the matter. What do people like me 
know of such things? J grew up in a time when one still looked up in 
reverence to the more melodious Mozart and Haydn and Rossini, and 
the new music, which only a short time ago was called the music of 
the future, but which appears already to have become the music of the 
present, is less easy for us of the older generation to comprehend. I 
too have heard Tannhduser, and also several others of the operas of 
Wagner. I admire the rich orchestration in the new music. Of this 
Mozart and his contemporaries had no conception. But to compen- 
sate for that, their music was, as I have just said, more melodious, the 
arias more singable, and an ordinary unlearned listener could under- 
stand it far more easily. But I ought not to express an opinion. I 
understand nothing of these things. People of my sort take the great- 
est delight in a beautiful song, or in operas like the old Magic Flute, or 
Don Juan. You young people of today—you over-educated young 
people, I would call you, if I were not afraid of being misunderstood— 
you prefer more highly seasoned fare and—Wagner music. 

It may be that my judgment of Wagner has been unconsciously 
affected by a slight prejudice against the composer which I have never 
been able to overcome. Forty years ago (nearly) Wagner published 
a brochure entitled The Jews and Music. ‘This revealed him as an 
out-and-out anti-Semite, as one who feels deep antipathy against 
everything connected in any way with Jews or Judaism. In all such 
things, including “‘Jewish” music, he finds nothing but what is 
ignoble and mean, nothing elevating or inspiring; even the virtuosi 
on the stage or in the concert hall are in his eyes not sincere disciples of 
art, but only people animated by vain ambition or vulgar avarice; 
Cle. el. 

Shall we applaud such ideas? the ideas on which Wagner’s judg- 
ments were based? Must not every Jew with a remnant of Jewish 
feeling in his soul indignantly oppose such views? Felix Mendelssohn, 
noble and glorious, both as man and as musician, whom J, at least, rank 
high above Wagner—only think! this Mendelssohn, he says, is only 
one of those Jews who through their music have vitiated the German 
national spirit! My judgment regarding music as such is only that 


92 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


of a dilettante; but I know at least so much, that Wagner, in this 
respect, at any rate, was ignoble-minded and contemptible. 
Now I must stop. I have talked enough for this time. Greetings 
to you and your dear mother and sister. 
Faithfully your uncle, 
B. FELSENTHAL 


My mother died in 1901. ~My father bore his loneliness, 
after thirty-six years of marriage, as a wise old man, experi- 
enced in life, would. He said little and after the first shock 
of separation showed no change in manner, though he wrote 
sadly enough of the blow that had fallen upon him. 

Shortly after, we established a joint household with one 
of my sisters, and this brought to my father, among other 
satisfactions, that of having for a year or two, until the 
families separated again, a small grandchild in the house. 

It was the next year that his eightieth birthday was 
celebrated. Many gathered to hear the words that were 
publicly spoken in appreciation, in reverential appreciation, 
of his work and character. Resolutions, letters, gifts, came 
from groups and individuals, and Orthodox as well as Reform 
Jews joined in doing him honor. One Jewish organization 
sent him a laurel wreath in gold inscribed in Hebrew, ‘‘ The 
righteous shall flourish like the palm tree”; George Kohut 
wrote a sonnet which appeared in the Menorah Monthly; 
Naphtali Herz Imber dedicated to him the English transla- 
tion of his Hebrew Zionistic poem, ‘“‘Hatikwah” (‘‘The 
Hope’”’); the Hebrew Union College conferred upon him the 
honorary degree of D.D. He was deeply moved by all these 
tributes of respect and affection. His letters showed it, 
as did also the modest responses he made after the ordeal of 
the public addresses. I say ordeal, for something in his 
attitude, in his expression, made one aware of the inward 
embarrassment he felt as he listened to praise of himself. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 93 


In 1905 the honorary degree of D.D. was conferred upon 
him for a second time by the Jewish Theological Seminary, of 
which Dr. Solomon Schechter, great and learned, was presi- 
dent at the time. 

One remembers regretfully that Dr. Schechter and my 
father, congenial spirits, never had the joy of conversing 
with each other. They had the same passion for Jewish 
learning, had (at this time) similar if not identical viewpoints 
in regard to certain vital Jewish problems, and had qualities 
of character which would have made intercourse between 
them a delight. They knew each other’s worth, and the 
few letters they exchanged and the words they spoke, each 
of the other, had the tone of admiration and true friendship. 

When I say that Dr. Schechter and my father had 
similar opinions in regard to Jewish problems, I do not 
forget that Dr. Schechter represented a more conservative 
school of thought than that with which my father had all 
his life been identified. But my father, it must be said, was 
deeply disappointed in the later results of Reform. ‘That 
gratifying increase of religious fervor and religious loyalty 
which had been its first fruit had not been permanent. 
The movement had been over-zealous in one direction. Too 
much had been discarded. Customs and ceremonies and 
institutions which still retained their “life-giving power” 
had been cast aside along with the others. ‘‘Man soll nicht 
das Kind mit dem Bade ausschiitten,” my father wrote in 
Kol Kore Bamidbar in 1859, but it was just that which later 
he seemed to think had actually happened. 

He began to express his misgivings as early as 1875, 
76, °78. In various articles and addresses published 
during those years he spoke with great emphasis of the 
danger of Jewish reform which does not place the accent on 
its Jewishness. ‘‘We must not utterly cast aside all the 


94 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


great traditions of our past,” he says, “‘nor consent to mow 
down ruthlessly everything that is characteristically Jew- 
ish.”* Among his papers an undated scrap, headed “Signs 
of Disintegration,” contains this significant sentence: “A 
generation has risen up to whom Jewish rites and customs 
and usages are as unknown as those of the Hindus.” And 
this change, he adds, has taken place within the short space 
of twenty years. 

To be sure, he did not yield easily to discouragement, 
and on more than one occasion, as, for example, in 1886, on 
the twenty-fifth anniversary of the founding of Sinai, 
he spoke of the excellent results which had been accom- 
plished by Reform. By the 1900’s, however, his doubts 
appear to have become settled convictions, and in the last 
year of his life he wrote (in a letter to Rabbi S. N. Deinard, 
dated March 1, 1907): 


It will one day be recognized that what we call “Reform Judaism” 
is not the highest and finest and best thing to be found in modern 
Israel, is not that which is most worthy of our devotion. The thought 
often comes to my mind that this extreme Reform we have in America, 
which knows no limit, will lead gradually to the extinction of Israel 
and its religion. ... Do you not agree with me that our Reform 
friends are preparing “‘a beautiful death” for Judaism ? 


And he goes on to say, as in the letter to Dr. Magnes, 
already quoted, that he would not wish to be an accomplice 
in such a proceeding. 

Yet it would be entirely wrong to infer from these expres- 
sions that he did not hold as firmly as ever to his conception 
of Judaism as an ever developing religion. From beginning 
to end this thought colors his opinions—is, rather, their 


*Cf. “Unter welchen Bedingungen sind die Pforten unserer Gotteshiuser 
Pforten der Gerechtigkeit ?” Bibliog. 97. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 95 


very foundation. It would not, perhaps, be incorrect to 
state his later views in regard to Reform in some such words 
as these: Reform is not the solution of the Jewish problem; 
for Reform, as practiced by Jews scattered among the 
nations, leads to absorption by non-Jewish nations and 
creeds, and for such an event it is ‘‘at least a thousand years 
too early.”’ Zionism, by reuniting the Jews in a land of their 
own, will give Judaism the opportunity “continually to 
adapt itself in its outward forms to time and circumstance,’ 
its adherents still remaining Jews. Thus his final hope, 
Zionism, did not contradict but rather contained, as a part 
of itself, the convictions of his early active years. 


A last change of residence occurred in 1904. It was the 
fourth in seven years, each one necessary for one practical 
reason or another. How my father—whose natural pref- 
erence would have been to live in one family homestead all 
his life—disliked these movings! I remember his saying, 
more than half in earnest, that 1t embarrassed him to report 
another change of address to his correspondents and to his 
newspapers and journals. 

We were at that time a household of only three, and my 
father’s days passed in a quiet routine. Two or three times 
a week he went to read in ‘“‘the library” (the Chicago 
Public or the Newberry) as he had done from as far back 
as we could remember; he attended meetings of the Chicago 
Rabbinical Association; occasionally he made visits. More 
often others came to see him—relatives, old friends, rabbis 
passing through the city. Most days passed without inci- 
dent and were followed by short, quiet evenings in which he 
sat reading in his Morris chair beside the lamp. 


t Cf. “Unsere Freude bei der Tempelweihe.”’ Bibliog. 24. 


96 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


In some ways it was a too restricted life. For it is clear 
that he would have deeply enjoyed many things circum- 
stances prevented him from having—music, a large library 
of his own, more constant intercourse with scholarly 
associates. But he could do without. To say that he did 
not complain or that he did not even let it be known that he 
missed such intellectual joys is to state the matter crudely. 
I think it never occurred to him that he was deprived of 
these things. Among such and such conditions in life he 
was placed, and this and that was his work. In some such 
fashion he might have expressed himself in regard to the life, 
the very simple life, he led. He never knew how to make 
demands for himself, neither of persons nor of Life. 


There was one brief interruption to the quiet of this period 
when my father went to Louisville in the summer of 1904 to 
register his emphatic nay before the Central Conference on 
the question which was then prominently before the Reform 
rabbis of the country of establishing a synod. Such a 
proposal had been made at various times in the past, and 
had always drawn from my father vigorous expression of his 
views, and sometimes indignant, even impassioned protest. 

‘The modern Jewish consciousness,” he had written as 
far back as 1857, ‘‘is opposed to all Sanhedrins; denies them 
the right to usurp the authority which belongs to individual 
Jews; would, if a Sanhedrin still existed, employ all legiti- 
mate means to destroy it as an obstacle to the development 
of Judaism, disturbing, checking, and fettering the freedom 
of thought and liberty of conscience of the individual.’ 
And in one of the twenty-seven theses which the next year 


*Cf. “Offenbarungsglauben und Reform. Sind Beide zu vereinbaren ?”’ 
Bibliog. 7. 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 97 


he presented to the Jiidischer Reformverein, he spoke of the 
_ danger inherent in a formulated “confession of faith,” and 
laid down as the one and only dogma to which the members 
of the society must subscribe: ‘“‘ Absolute freedom of faith 
and of conscience for all.’”’ In 1881, in 1886, in 1890, and 
whenever, through the years, he touched upon this subject 
of authority in the personal religious life, he wrote as one 
to whom the very thought was unendurable. This, for 
instance, is characteristic: 


What? A majority shall rule over us in matters of religious 
thinking and doing? It is difficult to understand that American 
Israelites, otherwise so deeply imbued with Jeffersonian democratic 
principles, and especially with the principle that each individual has 
the right to worship God according to the dictates of his own con- 
science, should advocate the proposition to erect over us a hierarchical 
institution with law-giving and law-enforcing powers.? 


At the time of the Louisville conference in 1904 there was 
imminent danger that such an institution would be estab- 
lished. A number of the leaders favored it, and a vote was 
to be taken which might bring the synod actually into being. 
In justice it must be said that the sponsors of the synod 
conceived it somewhat differently from my father: they 
denied any intention to fetter the individual in his religious 
thinking, and in general refused to see in the synod the 
dangerous possibilities which my father felt convinced were 
there. But to him the attempt of 1904 seemed “a treacher- 
ous assault upon our spiritual freedom, upon our personality, 
which, in the words of Goethe, is surely the most precious 
possession of the sons of men.”’ 

My father could not remain away from the Conference at 
such a time, could not remain silent when by speaking he 


1 Cf. “Some Questions of the Day.” Bibliog. 233. 


98 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


might influence the minds of a few. He traveled to Louis- 
ville and made an extraordinarily vigorous address before 
the assembled rabbis, with the result that the synod was 
defeated, the vote being tied. ‘The question of its establish- 
ment has not, however, been raised again since that day. 

The incident, gratifying to my father in its result, must 
have been so on its personal side also. The members of the 
Conference, of whatever shade of opinion they were, listened 
to him with extreme respect. They gathered about him as 
about a revered leader. One among them called him “‘the 
aged yet youthful master,” and spoke of the inspiration 
which he brought to them—‘inspiration which evidently 
flows from a perpetual spring.” 


The last chapter of my father’s life, his two last invalid 
years, began on Sunday, the fifteenth of October, 1905. He 
had taken part that morning in the special service which was 
held at Sinai Temple to celebrate the twenty-fifth anniver- 
sary of Rabbi Hirsch’s connection with the congregation. 
I remember that he stopped for a moment in the Sunday- 
school rooms to look at the children before going up to the 
auditorium. J remember his beautiful expression, his look 
of health and vigor. At midnight he lay in a hospital under- 
going a serious operation for which sudden and terrible pain 
had shown the immediate need. 

His recovery, alas! was not complete. When he came 
home to us at New Year’s, he was no longer young and 
strong—no one called him after that the young old man— 
but dependent, weak, an invalid, for whom the remem- 
brance of strength made invalidism hard to bear. 

Never for a single hour from this time on was he free 
from discomfort; on many days he suffered intensely; and, 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 99 


what was hardly less severe a trial to him, he needed always 
_ to be waited upon. He would never before this so much as 
allow one to help him with his overcoat or to take his arm 
in crossing the street. He bore it all, not with the stoicism 
of which he had been capable in earlier years, but patiently, 
though he was inwardly very sad. ‘‘ Wie Gott will, ich halt’ 
still,’ he wrote in his letters, but indeed he did not know 
how to complain. 

Grateful for every small service, slow to ask even for 
necessary attention, the closer one came to him the more 
lovable he appeared. Everyone loved him—nurses, doctors, 
neighbors, the little Bohemian maid-servant. To his family, 
inexpressibly precious are the memories of those years he 
was dependent upon us, those years in which he showed, as 
never before, that it gave him comfort to have us near him. 

Once during this time, in a letter to Uncle Henry, he 
gave expression to dark thoughts on life and suffering and 
human destiny. He quoted Heine (his sentiment if not his 
words): ‘‘At the end, Death stops our questionings with a 
handful of earth stuffed in our mouths. But is that an 
answer?” The letter reflects a transitory mood, born of 
weakness and pain. His permanent philosophy, as is clear 
from everything else he wrote and from every word he 
spoke, was one of courage and faith. 

But I must not write as if these years were wholly sad. 
After the first hard months, my father was able to sit with 
us at table again, to take short walks, to read and write in 
the family living-room. His two grandchildren in the city, 
little girls of three and five, were often in the house. Listen- 
ing to their sweet voices he forgot his pain, and his eyes 
shone with love and happiness. ‘The stories he told them! 
the songs he sang! 


100 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


The world outside held his absorbed interest to the end. 
On previous pages I have included letters touching on 
Zionism written during this period. He feels keenly, he 
writes in one of them, his inability to do anything for the 
cause. His enthusiasm for Zionism is as alive as it ever 
was. . . . I remember a day when, surrounded by four or 
five ardent Zionists, he spoke of Zionistic aims and hopes, 
and his face and voice were like a prophet’s. 

Uncle Henry came often to see him. His visits were 
“like rays of golden sunshine.”’ Other friends came. His 
eighty-fifth birthday was a gala day. There were many 
visitors, and the house was filled with flowers. My father 
was grateful for every sign of love, and was happier than 
we could have believed, a year before, that he would ever 
be again. 

During the summer of 1907, we lived in a suburb near 
Chicago. For the first time he was satisfied to leave his 
books and greatly enjoyed the trees and the blessed quiet. 
When we returned to the city in September, he was better 
in health and more serene in spirit. Accustomed now to his 
invalid state, he settled quietly into the home routine. 

Day followed day, the autumn passed—and then, just 
before the close of the year, my father fell sick of pneumonia, 
and on the twelfth day of January, 1908, ten days after he 
had completed his eighty-sixth year, his life ended, and our 
dearly beloved father passed from our sight. 


That my father should vanish utterly from the earth, 
that the world should go on so much the poorer, was a thought 
I could not bring myself to accept. Somehow he must be 
made to live in the minds of more than those few with whom 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL IOI 


he exchanged words. While he lived, it was good to come 
in contact with him; and if it were possible to draw in words 
his soul’s portrait, would it not be as though he were still 
among men, still an uplifting presence in the world ? 

If it had been possible to me, I would have written in 
such a way that the very quality of his presence would 
have been conveyed. I would have made it seem as though 
he entered the room where one read. 

As best I could I have tried to share what I have had. 


APPENDIX 


ORIGINALS OF GERMAN LETTERS INCLUDED IN TEXT 


Translation, p. 5 
4. Marz 1903. 
An Fraulein Bertha Levi, 
in Frankfurt am Main. 
LIEBE NICHTE! 

Bereits mehrere Wochen sind verflossen, seit ich Deinen jiingsten, 
im Dezember an mich abgesandten Brief erhalten habe, und bis 
heute—ich muss mich selbst anklagen—ist er unbeantwortet geblieben. 
Hoffentlich, liebe Bertha, bist Du nun nachsichtig genug gesinnt, um 
mich zu entschuldigen und um eine geniigende Erklirung dafiir in 
dem Umstande zu finden, dass ich doch nicht mehr zu den jungen 
Leuten mich zahlen kann, welche heitern Sinnes, froh und frei, zur 
Feder greifen ké6nnen, um mit fernen theuern Freunden in Briefen 
Gedanken auszutauschen. Nun widersprich nicht, liebe Bertha, sage 
nicht, dass ich ja, um die Zahl meiner Jahre auszugeben, bloss die 
zwei Ziffern 1 und 8 niederzuschreiben hatte. Ja, darin hast Du wohl 
recht. Aber—aber—die Ziffer 8 muss links placirt werden, u. die 
Ziffer 1 rechts; nicht aber umgekehrt. Vergiss nicht, dass ich 81 
Jahre hinter mir habe, u. nicht erst 18, u. dass ein mehr als Achtzig- 
jahriger von Natur aus mehr oder minder unthatig wird, schreibfaul, 
nachlassig, und so weiter, und so weiter. Den Naturgesetzen, den 
Gesetzen des Seelenlebens sowohl wie denen des leiblichen Lebens, 
kann aber Niemand sich widersetzen, u. wir Alle miissen uns ihrem 
Schalten u. Walten in Ergebung unterwerfen. 

“Der Onkel wird missmuthig, haingt pessimistischen Gedanken- 
gangen nach; er schreibt gewiss an einem triiben Tage,’’—so wirst Du 
vielleicht denken, nachdem Du bis hierher gelesen haben wirst. Aber 
es ist denn doch nicht so. Ich ergehe mich nicht in philosophischen 
Lebensbetrachtungen, weder in pessimistischen, noch in optimist- 
ischen, sondern ich berichte bloss Thatsachen. 

Doch auch das Thatsichliche hat ja zwei Seiten. Ich war immer 
gewohnt, ja ich habe mir immer Miihe gegeben, iiberall in objectiver 


I02 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 103 


Ruhe u. ohne Voreingenommenheit alles Seiende u. Geschehende 
von zwel Seiten zu betrachten, von der dunkeln u. der heitern. Damit 
Du nun nicht glaubst, mich belaste u. bedriicke das Alter in sehr 
hohem Grade, so will ich beifiigen, dass ich auch Grund habe, auf die 
helle Kehrseite des Bildes hinzuweisen, u. dass ich im Stande bin zu 
sagen, das ich in Anbetracht der Zahl meiner Lebensjahre wohl u. 
vergniigt bin, u. von Ermattung u. Erschlaffung u. Hinfalligkeit u. 
Greisenhaftigkeit noch nicht erdriickt werde. Meinem Schépfer sei 
Dank dafiir! 

Das hohere Alter ist nicht die Zeit der ausblickenden Hoffnungen, 
sondern der riickschauenden Erinnerungen. Ich vergleiche solches 
hohere Alter der Abendstunde, da nach einem langen arbeits- u. 
wechselreichen Tage, an welchem Regen u. Sonnenschein, Stiirme u. 
Ruhepausen, Wolken u. blauer Himmel abwechselnd uns zu Theil 
geworden. Man sitzt ruhig vor der Thiire seines Hauses u. blickt 
gedankenvoll der allmiahlich sich senkenden Sonne nach. In unserer 
Erinnerung wendet sich der Blick unseres Geistes zuriick zu dem 
entschwindenden Tage. Allerlei Bilder ziechen vor dem innern Auge 
voriiber, u. mancherlei sind die Gedanken, welche kaleidoskopisch vor 
uns sich aufrollen. Wohl uns, wenn dadurch nicht die heitere Ruhe 
u. Selbstzufriedenheit unseres Geistes gest6rt oder gar zerstort wird, 
wenn wir mit ruhigem Gewissen auf den dahingegangenen Tag 
zuriickschauen kénnen, wenn wir sagen kénnen, es seien der schénen 
Tage doch mehr gewesen als der unschdnen, u. wenn man dann auch 
in Friede u. Freudigkeit der nun rasch nahenden Nacht entgegen 
gehen kann, in der das Gestirn des Tages uns nicht mehr scheint. 

Indem ich vorstehende Worte niederschrieb, fiel mir ein gar tief 
empfundener Vers meines Lieblingsdichters Géthe ein, der unendlich 
besser als ich es auszudriicken im Stande bin, den Gedanken Ausdruck 
leiht, die in diesem Augenblick meine Seele erfiillen. Der Vers lautet 
so: “Ueber allen Gipfeln—ist Ruh’—in allen Wipfeln—spiirest Du— 
kaum einen Hauch.—Die Végelein schweigen im Walde.—Warte nur 
balde—ruhest Du auch.” 

Doch genug davon! Ich bin heiter u. getrost; auch koérperlich 
ganz wohl u. riistig. .. . 

Wie geht es denn Dir, liebe Bertha? Es ist mir ausserordentlich 
erfreulich, denken zu kénnen, dass Du in allezeit lebensfreudiger 
Stimmung u. heitern reinen Sinnes durch das Leben schreitest, u. dass 


104 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Dir auch vom allgiitigen Schicksalslenker Gesundheit u. Wohlergehen 
in reichem Masse beschieden sein wird. 
Adieu fiir heute! Tausend Herzensgriisse von Deinem so fernen 


u. doch in Gedanken Dir nahen Onkel 
B. FELSENTHAL 


Translation, p. 8 


Was mich betrifft, so ist es iibrigens nicht bloss das Band der 
Freundschaft zu einem wackerstrebenden jungen Mann und das 
Band der Achtung vor einem tiichtiggn Character, das mich zu Ihnen 
zieht,—es ist auch das Band der nahen Blutsverwandtschaft, das uns 
zusammenhalt. Wohl bin ich schon seit fast 24 Jahren aus Deutsch- 
land ausgewandert u. in Amerika angesiedelt, aber trotzdem bin ich 
immer noch ein so starker deutscher old fogy, dass ich stets noch viel 
auf mischpochah halte. Ihre selige Mutter, deren herrliches Bild 
nicht aus meinem Geiste schwinden wird, so lange ich im Stande sein 
werde, Erinnerungen festzuhalten, und mir neu in’s Bewusstsein 
zuriick zu rufen, war mir von friihester Kindheit an so innig befreundet, 
dass ich auch schon um ihretwillen zu deren Sohn mich besonders 
hingezogen fiihle. 


Translation, p. 28 


Unsere Reformbestrebungen gehen sehr langsam vorwarts. Es 
wird Sie dies nicht Wunder nehmen, wenn Sie bedenken welche 
michtigen Feinde solchen Bestrebungen entgegen stehen. Da ist (1) 
die Dummheit und Unwissenheit—und ‘‘gegen die Dummbheit 
kampfen die Gotter selbst vergebens’’; da ist (2) der rohe Fanatis- 
mus, welcher mit Awto-da-fés antworten méchte, wenn man seinen 
heiligen Staub und Moder angreift; da ist (3) der bloss in Geldsucht 
sich concentrierende Sinn des grossen Haufens, der kalt und gleich- 
giiltig an jedem idealen und uneigenniitzigen Streben voriibergeht. 
Doch verzage ich nicht, dass eine bessere Morgenréthe auch fiir unsere 
umnachteten jiidischen Zustiande tagen wird. 


Translation, p. 34 


Wie fiihlte sich die moderne, amerikanische ‘‘Democracy” 1854, 
ja noch 1856 so sicher, so uniiberwindlich, ein wahres Gibraltar! 
Heute ist es anders, und wenn es auch mdglich sein mag, dass 1860 
die Drahtzieher noch einmal es dahin bringen dass ein demokratischer 





TEACHER IN ISRAEL 105 


Prasident in’s ‘‘weisse Haus” einzieht, so hat doch das free soil Ele- 
ment eine so feste Wurzel in den Ueberzeugungen der Masse gewonnen, 
dass es nicht mehr auszuwurzeln ist. Keine Macht auf Erden ist 
hierzu stark genug. Machen Sie, lieber Adler, nicht an sich selbst 
die Erfahrung dass Sie, wenn Sie iiberhaupt noch ein Demokrat sind, 
nicht mehr mit derselben Begeisterung an der Partei hingen, wie vor 
zwei Jahren, an dieser filibustierenden, Cuba-stehlen-wollenden, 
Sklaverei-ausdehnenden, corrupten Demokratie? Ich miisste mich 
sehr irren, wenn ich annehmen miisste, Sie wiirden heute noch einmal 
fiir Buchanan stimmen. @ 

Doch lassen wir Politik Politik sein. Gliicklich der, welcher 
diesem Schlamm politischer Wiihlerei fern steht, und dem innerhalb 
seines Hauses ein Reich bereitet ist, wo keine feindseligen Parteien 
bestehen, sondern wo Alle sich in inniger Liebe und Treue zugethan 
sind. In diesem Reiche bestehen auch Frauenrechte, und mégen auch 
Damen den Prasidentenstuhl einnehmen, und durch Anmuth und 
liebenden Sinn herrschen. 


Translation, p. 35 


In Bezug auf meine dussern Giiter, so wollen dieselben sich nicht 
mehren, noch sehe ich keine Aussicht dafiir. Aber gliicklicher 
Weise bin ich so ‘‘genaturt,’’ dass Geld keinen besonders grossen 
Werth fiir mich hat. ‘‘Das Geld, das Geld ist eine Chimdre,”—Sie 
erinnern sich dieser Passage aus Robert der Teufel. Zwar hat auch 
Baron Rothschild einiges Recht, der, als er einst in der Oper jene 
Worte vernommen hatte, von seiner Loge aus den Zusatz gemacht 
haben soll, “‘Wer aber kaan’s hat, ’s ist doch ’ne G’sereh.”’ Freilich 
ist es eine ‘‘G’sereh,” und auf manches muss man verzichten, ja 
mit Schmerz verzichten, woran die Seele hangt. Doch was ist da zu 
machen? In solchen Lagen ist es gut, wenn man sich einen stoischen 
Gleichmuth bewahren kann, und wenn man mit dem alten Volkslied 
sagen kann, “Freund, ich bin zufrieden, geh’ es wie es will.”’ 


Translation, p. 40 


Guten Morgen, meine werthe Freundin, Frl. Marie G. 

An Jhrem heutigen Geburtstagfeste gewahrt es mir eine besondere 
Freude, mich unter die Zahl Ihrer Freunde zu mischen, die Ihnen 
herzliche Gliickwiinsche darbringen. Ich méchte Ihnen recht viel 


106 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Liebes und Schénes sagen, doch ich fasse alles in das eine Wort 
zusammen: Mége der géttliche Schicksalslenker Ihnen einen recht 
heiteren, schénen, sonnenbestrahlten Lebensweg erdffnen, den Sie, 
u.s.w., u.s.w. Nun, Sie konnen sich die Fortsetzung selber denken. 
Wer, wie Sie, einen so klaren Geist besitzt, dem fallt es nicht schwer, 
halbe Satze zu erginzen, und wer, wie Sie, zu hellem Kopfe auch ein 
edles Herz gesellt, mit lichtem Gedanken ein reines Gemiith har- 
monisch vereinigt, dem ist die Aufgabe siiss und leicht, sich u. andern 
das Leben gar begliickt zu gestalten. 

Nun, liebe Marie, denken Sie sich noch etliche dutzend Seiten mit 
den schénsten Wiinschen fiir Ihr Wohl beschrieben, mit Gedanken wie 
sie nur der Feder unserer genialsten Dichter entstammen kénnen, u. 
glauben Sie dann, das Alle die herrlichen Gedanken u. herzlichen 
Wiinsche Ihnen zum Geburtstage geweiht seien von Ihrem Vetter u. 
Freunde u. ehemaligen Lehrer, 

B. FELSENTHAL 


Translation, p. 53 


Gegner, doppelt iiberlegen, 
Ausgeriistet mit zwiefalter 

Waff’ als Dichter und Sachwalter; 
Wenn ich dir mich stell’ entgegen, 
Nenn’ ich’s um so mehr verwegen, 
Als, wie du mir selbst gedroht, 
Dir als Anwalt dar sich bot 

Gute Sach’ und mir die schlechte; 
Dass mir bangt, wie ich verfechte 
Falschheit gegen Treu im Tod. 


GEEHRTER HERR ROSENTHAL! 


Mit den obigen Verszeilen, die ich ganz bona fide als Motto an die 
Spitze der gegenwartigen Epistel stelle, schliesse ich meinerseits die 
Discussion, die ich in diesen Tagen mit Ihnen hatte. Der Vers soll, 
mutatis mutandis, als mein freundliches Schlusswort gelten. Zum 
besseren Verstandnis des urspriinglichen Sinnes der Verse seien noch 
die folgenden literarhistorischen Notizen beigefiigt. Vor 60 Jahren 
haben sich Uhland und Riickert einmal gegenseitig ‘‘angedichtet.”’ 
Das Thema der Wechselgedichte war: Ist der Treubruch oder der 
Tod der Geliebten das Betriibendere? Zuerst begann Uhland mit 4 





TEACHER IN ISRAEL 107 


zehnzeiligen Strophen, und dann antwortete Riickert mit einem 
Gedichte gleichen Umfangs. Meine Verszeilen an der Spitze dieses 
Briefes bilden die einleitende Strophe im R.’schen Gedichte. 

Meine Absicht am Anfang der Woche war, Sie mit Ihren Argu- 
menten vor die Oeffentlichkeit zu locken; aber es gelang mir nicht. 
Was Sie mir privat sagten, das hatten Sie auch vor einem grisseren 
Publicum sagen kénnen. Erschépft iibrigens—das geben Sie wohl 
zu—ist das Thema noch lange nicht. 


Beste Griisse von 
Ihrem 
B. FELSENTHAL 
CHICAGO, 2. Dezbr. 1886. 


Cf. p. 54 


MEIN LIEBER FREUND ROSENTHAL! 


I5. sept. 1903. 


Ich bin doch ein recht sonderbar veranlagter Mensch. Aus 
vieljahrigen, theils bewussten, theils unbewussten Selbstbeobachtungen 
ist es mir klar geworden, dass meine ganze Denkmethode von Natur 
aus eine dialectische ist. Neben meinen eigenen Gedanken ver- 
nehme ich das Dazwischenreden eines—wie soll ich sagen ?—eines 
Nicht Ich, und darauf antwortet mein Ich wieder in seiner Weise. 
Eben jetzt, da ich mich zum Niederschreiben des gegenwirtigen Briefes 
niedersetze, ist es mir als ob in meinem Inneren zwei Stimmen im 
Wechselgesprach sich héren liessen, und ihr heriiber u. hiniiberreden 
lasst sich etwa in der folgenden Weise wiedergeben: 

Nicht Ich: An wen schreibst Du denn eigentlich den Brief den Du 
jetzt beginnst ? 

Ich: An einen lieben alten Jungen dem... 

Nicht Ich: Wart ein wenig! Du sagst an einen lieben alten 
Jungen. “Alter Junge’—ist das nicht ein Widerspruch in sich 
selbst ? 

Ich: Nun so wollen wir den Ausdruck umwenden. Sagen wir dafiir 
an einen jungen Alten. 

Nicht Ich: Ach was, das ist ja fast dasselbe, “Alter Junge,” 
“Junger Alte’—so was gibt’s nicht. 

Ich: Warum nicht? Kannst du Dir nicht denken, dass es 
Menschen gibt, die bereits eine lange Reihe von Jahren durchlebt 
haben, die aber trotzdem an Geist und Gemiith jung geblieben sind ? 


108 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Nichi Ich: Also das ist’s was Du meinst? Aber was ist denn das 
Richtigere, “Junger Alte” oder ‘Alter Junge’? Dass es eine 
gewisse Nuancierung der Begriffe ergibt, wenn man den einen oder 
den andern dieser Ausdriicke gebraucht, das weiss ich wohl. Wel- 
chem dieser Ausdriicke sollen wir nun den Vorzug geben? 

Ich: Das hingt davon ab, auf welchen Umstand wir gerade den 
Hauptaccent legen wollen, ob auf die Zahl der Jahre, oder auf Geist 
und Herz. In dem einen Falle gebraucht man das eine Wort als das 
Haupt- und Grundwort u. das Andere als das naherbestimmende 
Eigenschaftswort. In dem andern Falle macht man es gerade 
umgekehrt. 

Nicht Ich: Nun, welche der beiden Bezeichnungen wirst Du im 
gegenwirtigen Fall vorziehen ? 

Ich: Ich glaube ich will meinen Brief an den alten Jungen 
addressieren. 


Sehen Sie, Freund Rosenthal, in dieser Weise schnurrt es in diesem 
Augenblick in meinem Denkapparat hin u. her. Mein Schreiben ist 
namlich fiir Sie bestimmt und—und—well, ich schreibe an meinen 
lieben alten Jungen. Was aber veranlasst mich heute zu diesem 
Schreiben ? mich den Schreibfaulen, mich den in seiner Correspondenz 
so Nachlassigen ? 

Soll ich’s Ihnen sagen? Wohlan, es ist mir dieser Tage recht- 
zeitig zu Ohren gekommen, dass Sie am 17 d. M. Ihr 75. Lebensjahr 
vollenden werden, u.s.w. Da werden doch an diesem Tage viele Ihrer 
Freunde, theils in Person, theils in Briefen u. Telegrammen, an Sie 
hintreten u. Ihnen Gliick u. Segen u. fernere heitere Jahre wiinschen 
etc., etc. Kann ich da, darf ich da zuriickbleiben ? 

Ja, mein lieber Freund Rosenthal, Sie sind nun auch 75 Jahre alt 
geworden, ein “alter Herr,” aber ein junger alter Herr. Wir—mit 
dem wir meine ich uns, Ihre Freunde,—wir freuen uns dass Sie an 
Kopf und Herz jung und frisch geblieben sind, dass Ihr Denken immer 
noch ein riistiges u. energisches, Ihr Gefiihlsleben immer noch ein 
griines und bliihendesist. Ja, wir freuen uns dessen, und wir wiinschen 
dass es so bleiben mége bis—bis—wissen Sie wie Ihre selige Gross- 
mutter den Satz erginzt haben wiirde p—“ Bis zu hundert Jahr.” Thr 
Grossvater hatte dieselbe Erginzung gemacht, nur in andern Worten: 
at atNl nde 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL 109 


Ich konnte jetzt aufhéren, ja ich sollte jetzt aufhéren, denn am 
Ende ist’s unrecht von mir, dass ich Ihnen zumuthe eine lange Epistel 
von mir zu lesen; insbesondere heute, da die Madchen draussen 
warten, mit denen Sie doch tanzen miissen, indess die Melodie auf- 
gespielt wird: Als der Grossvater die Grossmutter nahm. Aber ich 
kann mich nicht zuriickhalten wenigstens noch einen Vers hier zu 
citieren, welcher von dem altgewordenen Vischer, dem ‘‘ Vauvischer”’ 
herstammt und welcher folgendermassen lautet: Ihr Leidenschaften 
ade!—Euer Scheiden thut mir nicht weh.—Nur eine mocht ich 
behalten, ja eine—den Zorn auf das Schlechte, das Gemeine! 

Mir gefallt Gedanke u. Wort des alten Schwaben gar sehr. Ich 
habe es mir gleichsam als ein Motto fiir mich erwahlt und weil das Wort 
mir so zusagt, so meinte ich, es kénnte auch Ihnen aus der Seele 
gesprochen sein. Wenn nicht, nun dann, nichts fiir ungut. Wir 
bleiben die Alten nichtsdestoweniger. | 

Nun ist’s aber Zeit adieu zu sagen. Adieu. Empfehl’ mich 


Thnen. 
Ihr alter 81 Jahr junger Freund, 


B, FELSENTHAL 


Chip..07 

Mein bescheidenes pPlaidoyer fiir die armen, kranken Juden zielt 
nun auf die Bitte ab, ein Winkelchen in der Hospitalkiiche irgend 
einer jiidischen Kéchin, u. sei diese selbst eine unwissende u. un- 
geschickte Polin, fiir Zubereitung koscherer Speisen zu iibergeben, u. 
solchen Kranken, die koscher zu essen haben wollen, koschere Speisen 
zu verabreichen. 

Lassen Sie mich in dieser Verbindung noch einen Punct beriihren. 
Im Hospital ist auch nicht ein einziger jiidischer Bediensteter. Fir 
manche auf dem Sterbelager Liegenden und fiir deren AngehGrige ist’s 
ein ungemein peinlicher Gedanke, dass in der letzten Scheidestunde 
kein Glaubensgenosse am Leidenslager stehe. Ware es gar nicht 
méglich, hier Abhiilfe zu schaffen? Zur Zeit, als man es in Frage 
stellte, ob denn iiberhaupt ein besonderes jiidisches Spital eine 
Existenzberechtigung habe, berief man sich unter Anderm auf das 
Bediirfniss sterbender Israeliten, in dunkler Stunde gleichfihlende, 
mitempfindende Glaubensgenossen um sich zu haben, u. wies man 
darauf hin, wie lieblos, u. vandalisch es wire, wenn man einem Ster- 


IIo BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


benden solchen Trost versagen wollte. Sollte es denn nun gar so 
schwer sein, fiir solchen Zweck Wege u.. Mittel zu finden ? 

Ich unterbreite nun ganz ergebenst obige Gedanken Ihrer Erwia- 
gung. Ich iiberlasse es auch Ihnen zu entscheiden, ob es weise ware, 
Vorstehendes zur Kenntnisnahme der Hospitalverwaltung zu bringen. 
Und ich schliesse mit der Bitte, es mir zu glauben, dass ich nur von 
dem Gefiihl der Theilnahme fiir arme, hiilfsbediirftige Menschen 
bestimmt worden bin, endlich—nach langem Zogern—die Feder zu 
ergreifen. 


Translation, p. 71 


Sie waren vor etlichen Wochen so giitig iiber meine historische 
Monographie, The Beginnings of the Chicago Sinai Congreg’n, mir 
einige freundliche Worte zu sagen. Ich danke Ihnen dafiir von ganzem 
Herzen. Aber ankniipfend daran méchte ich einen Wunsch 4ussern. 
Sie sind ein Mitglied des Executive Council der A.J.H.S. Sie, in 
Verbindung mit andern leitenden Herren im Executive Council, sollten 
nun meines Erachtens geeignete Persdnlichkeiten zu bestimmen 
suchen, solche Monographien tiber andere Partieen der amerikan.— 
jiidischen Geschichte zu schreiben. In den 2o0er Jahren z.B. entstand 
in der jiid. Gemeinde Beth Elohim in Charleston, S.C., eine starke 
reformistische Stro6mung. Deren Quellen u. Verlauf aufzusuchen u. 
zu beschreiben, ist heute schon schwieriger, als es vor 12 oder 15 
Jahren gewesen. Aber sollte nicht um so mehr der Verwaltungsrath 
der Historical Society jetzt sich die Mithe geben, einen Herrn in 
Charleston zu veranlassen, dass er im Interesse der Geschichte einen 
objektiven Bericht iiber jene Charlestoner Bestrebungen zu Papier 
bringe ? 

Ein anderes Beispiel. Ende der 60er Jahre wurde in Philadelphia 
das Maimonides College gegriindet, u. dasselbe bestand 2 oder 3 
Jahre. Ohne alle subjektive Erregtheit u. ohne alle Leidenschaft 
k6énnte u. sollte, so meine ich, nun die Geschichte jenes Unternehmens 
geschrieben werden, sollten die Veranlassungen dazu, der Verlauf 
desselben, die Griinde des Zusammenbruchs, etc., aufgesucht u. 
dargelegt werden. 

Auch in einem zusammenfassenden Artikel ware die Geschichte 
der im r1oten Jhdt. in der Stadt New York geschaffenen jiid. 
Wohltatigkeitsanstalten zu schreiben. In geschichtl. Monographien 
kénnten vielleicht auch behandelt werden: The Mt. Sinai Hospital, 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL III 


the Orphan Asylum, the Old People’s Home in Yonkers, the United 
Hebrew Charities, etc. 

Es sind auch noch die Biographien von amerikan. Juden zu 
schreiben, die doch noch eine ganz andere Stelle einnehmen, als z.B. 
Col. Is. Franks oder Major D. S. Franks, iiber welche Mittheilungen 
im neuesten Band der Publications A.J.H.S. enthalten sind. Die 
Letztgenannten u. noch manche Andere—welche Bedeutung haben 
sie tiberhaupt fiir die Geschichte der Juden u. des Judenthums in 
Amerika? Man streiche sie ganz hinweg u. man wird keine Liicke 
in dieser Geschichte empfinden. Sie sind einflusslos voriibergegangen. 
Anders ist es mit Isaac Leeser, mit Samuel Isaacs, M. J. Raphall, 
L. Merzbacher, S. Adler, auch mit Abr. Reis in Baltimore u. etlichen 
Andern, die in der ersten Halfte dieses Jhdts. hier thaitig waren. 
Jedenfalls hatte hier die Biographik Objecte, an denen sie ihre Kunst 
zeigen u. tiben sollte. Auch der nun seit mehr als to Jahren im 
Grabe ruhenden Emma Lazarus sollte nun seitens unserer Hist. Society 
ein biographisches Denkmal errichtet werden. 

Ein anderes Gebiet fiir historische Forschung bietet sich dar in 
der Bibliographie der amerikanischen Judaica u. Hebraica. 


Translation, p. 81 


GEEHRTER HERR Doctor! 


Ein tobender Lirm u. ein unruhevolles Getése ist’s, das durch den 
unseligen Krieg veranlasst wurde, in welchen unser Land durch 
bése Zeitungen u. bose Menschen hineingestossen worden ist. Da 
treibt es denn doch Manchen, sich heraus zu fliichten aus dem 
Toben u. Tosen, u. Ruhe zu suchen bei seinen Biichern, oder in der 
Natur, oder im Verkehr mit ruhig und besonnen gebliebenen Freun- 
den, oder auf andern geeigneten Wegen. Auch mich iiberkommt 
zuweilen solche Stimmung, solches Sehnen nach Ruhe und Frieden. 
Werden Sie mir’s nun veriibeln, mein lieber Herr Professor, wenn ich 
auf ein Viertelstiindchen zu Ihnen mich fliichte, u. mit Ihnen plaudernd 
mich ergehe iiber Dies u. Das Pp— 

Die nach aussen bemerkbare Thatigkeit fiir den Zionismus wird 
nun allerdings unter gegenwirtigen Zeitlauften in Amerika vielfach 
gehemmt u. gehindert sein. Dessenungeachtet werden hoffentlich 
eine Anzahl von einflussreichen u. geachteten Mannern als amerika- 
nische Delegierte zum zweiten Baseler Congresse gehen. Wer sind 


II2 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


nun die Manner, welche als Delegaten erwahlt werden sollten? Ich 
brauche Ihnen keine Namen zu nennen,—aber jedenfalls sollten Sze 
einer derselben sein,—u. Sie kénnten u. sollten bestimmend auf die 
Wahl geetgneter Vertreter Einfluss tiben. Leider bin ich zu sehr 
vorgeriickt in Jahren, sonst wiirde ich, trotz aller meiner angeborenen 
Scheuheit, mit Freude u. Bereitwilligkeit vortreten u. auf die Frage: 
495 Sion "a5 MON 2 MN wie der junge Jesaias antworten: "237 
“srw. Doch leider kann ich nicht mehr, zum allerwenigsten auf 
diesem Gebiete, praktisch thatig sein. .. . 

Ihren |. Vater griissen Sie in meinem Namen bestens. Auch den 
Herren, den edelsinnigen u. hochherzigen Enthusiasten, die Sie in 
Basel sehen werden, richten Sie gefalligst meine Griisse aus u. sagen 
Sie denselben, dass an den Ufern des fernen Michigansees ein alter 
Mann sich befindet, der ihnen seine Segenswiinsche sendet. 
“Dreamers of the Ghetto” hat auch sie Zangwill genannt. Gebe 
Gott, wir hatten viele Tausende solcher Triumer! Die Welt bedarf 
ihrer, wie auf diesem, so auch in andern Gebieten. Was ware aus der 
Menschheit geworden, u. was wiirde aus der Menschheit werden, wenn 
es keine solche Traéumer gabe? 


Translation, p. 82 


Liebe Freunde, es ist eine hohe u. heilige Idee, in deren Dienst Sie 
sich gestellt haben. Es ist die Idee der Befreiung unserer Stammes- u. 
Glaubensbriider aus unsdglichem Elend, u. der Wiedergewinnung einer 
Heimath, unserer alten Heimath, fiir das verfolgte u. leidende Israel. 
O verzagen Sie nicht; erschlaffen Sie nicht in Ihrer Begeisterung fiir 
diese Idee! Bereits hat dieselbe die Herzen von Myriaden unserer 
Briider in allen Theilen der Welt ergriffen. Und ist das allein nicht 
schon Erfolg genug? Ist es nicht erfreuend, wahrzunehmen, dass 
durch den Zionismus so schéne Hoffnungen geweckt u. so viele 
Herzen gehoben u. so viele Charaktere veredelt werden? Wahrlich, 
Freunde, wir haben recht, wenn wir sagen: 55 MN 7W vy "WN 
TION. 

Translation, p. 88 
CuHIcaGo, ILL., 1905 
An Fri, Bertha Levi—Frankfurt */M. 

MEINE LIEBE NicuTeE! Es ist schon eine geraume Zeit verflossen, 
seitdem ich nicht mehr direct an Dich geschrieben habe. Aber Du 
wiirdest die Thatsache, dass meine Briefe so selten sind, ganz falsch 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL BiG 


beurtheilen, wenn Du, liebe Bertha, darin eine Verringerung meiner 
Liebe u. Freundschaft fiir Dich erblicken wolltest. Glaube mir, die 
lieben Freunde im alten deutschen Heimathslande sind mir, wenn 
auch raumlich ferri, im Geiste immer nahe, u. manche Stunde in 
Tagen, wenn ich einsam u. allein in meinem Studierzimmer sitze, 
oder in schlaflosen Nachten, wenn ich wachenden Auges meine 
Gedanken schweifen lasse dahin und dorthin, erfiillt sich mein Geist 
mit Gedanken an Euch Alle, Ihr lieben Freunde, die Thr driiben im 
fernen Deutschland Euch befindet. .. . 

Abermals habe ich Deinen lieben Brief vom 1. Sept. durchgelesen 
u. mich an Deinem heiteren u. herzlichen Geplauder erquickt. Mége 
Dir der giitige Gott noch recht lange, ja Dein ganzes Leben lang diese 
Geistesheiterkeit u. diesen Frohsinn erhalten. Wo solche freudevolle 
Lebensstimmungen fortwahrend heimisch sind, da muss der Quell, aus 
dem sie sprudeln, das Herz, ganz gewiss rein, klar u. lauter sein. Ein 
lauteres, unschuldvolles Herz,—das ist am Ende ein Besitz, iiber des- 
sen Werth gar kein anderes Besitzthum hinausgeht. Ein stets klares, 
kindlich unschuldvolles Herz, ein stets froh gestimmtes Gemiith,—wo 
gibt’s etwas schéneres in der Welt? Und weil ich das Herz so hoch 
halte, deshalb schiatze ich auch die Herzensbildung mehr als jede 
andere Art von Bildung! Es gibt gewiss nur wenige Worter, die so 
vielfach missverstanden u. falsch angewandt werden, als das Wort 
Bildung. Wen nennt die Welt nicht ‘‘gebildet”’? Ja, wer auch nur 
von den modischen, oft so inhaltsleeren modischen Tagesphrasen, die 
in der sogen. ‘‘ Gesellschaft’? umher schwirren, Gebrauch zu machen 
weiss,—ist der nicht auch “gebildet”? Aber ich zogere nicht zu: 
behaupten, dass, wenn nicht Herzensbildung dazu kommt, das andere 
nur hohler Schein ist, ein wesenloser Schein, ein diinner Firniss. Und 
wenn man diesen Firniss abkratzt, was kommt zum Vorschein? 
Herzensbildung ist mehr als intellectuelle Bildung, mehr als asthetische 
Bildung, mehr als dusserlicher Schliff, mehr als Eleganz u. Gewandt- 
heit im Verkehr mit andern, u.s.w. 

Ich freute mich, in Deinem Briefe zu lesen, dass Du manche Stunde 
an Sonntag-Nachmittagen in der 6ffentlichen Bibliothek oder im 
Stadel’schen Museum verbringst. Im Lesen von klassischen Schrif- 
ten, im Umgang mit den grossen Dichtern u. Denkern in vergangenen 
Zeiten, thut sich unser Geist weit auf u. es werden Gedanken u. Gefiihle 
in uns geweckt, die oft noch recht lange in uns nachklingen. u. auf 
unser ganzes Sein, auf unsern Charakter u. unsere Lebensftihrung 


II4 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


veredelnd einwirken kénnen. Ebenso verhialt es sich, wenn wir 6fters 
sinnend vor Gemilden u. Sculpturen grosser Meister weilen. Auch da 
empfinden wir, dass wir in hohe u. heilige Geistesgefilde eingetreten 
sind, dass wir emporgestiegen sind zu Gipfeln, wo wir reinere 
Hohenluft athmen. Allerdings wird der besonnene Mensch nicht 
fortwihrend in solcher Luft leben wollen oder leben kénnen. Fort- 
wihrend, das geht nicht. Unser alltigliches Leben fordert seine 
Rechte u. dringt auf die Erfiillung von Pflichten, die es uns auferlegt. 
Zu diesen Pflichten kehrt man dann immer wieder neu angeregt u. 
neu gekraftigt zuriick u. man erfiillt sie mit neuer Freudigkeit u. 
Willigkeit, nachdem man mit Schiller u. Godthe, mit Raphael u. 
Michel Angelo etliche selige Stunden genossen hat. .. . 

Und nun adieu, Du liebes “Frankfurter Madel.” (“Frankfurter 
Madel,” so hast Du Dich selber bezeichnet in Deinem jiingsten 
Briefe.) Adieu mein goldiges Frankfurter Miédel, adieu! Nur noch 
eine Bitte! Wenn Er kommt, wie der Prinz aus dem Marchenland, 
der in dem ‘‘ Madel”’ die herrliche Prinzessin erkennt, der er tief in 
die strahlenden Augen u. in das goldene Herz hinein schaut, u. die er 
dann bei der Hand fasset u. spricht . . . well, ich will nicht weiter 
fortfahren; ich iiberlasse das, was ich eben niederschreiben wollte, 
Dir zum Errathen. Aber nicht wahr, mein liebes Berthachen, Du 
lassest mich dann das Niahere wissen ? 


ieu! 
Nochmals adieu! Dein treuer Onkel 


B. FELSENTHAL 
Translation, p. 90 


CHICAGO, DEN 6. FEBR. 190 
MEINE LIEBE NICHTE BERTHA! : 995 


.. . Fiir die Photographieen sage ich Dir herzlichen Dank. 
Ja, sie sind sch6n, sehr sch6n. Wie muss nun das Original so lieb u. 
herzig sein! Bei langerm Anschauen kam mir unwillkiirlich der erste 
Vers eines bekannten Gedichtes von Heine ins Gedichtniss: “Du 
hast ja die schénsten Augen.” Aber freilich, die iibrigen, auf den 
ersten Vers folgenden Zeilen diirften vielleicht nicht passen. Aber was 
thut das? Die Augensindschén. Die Augen blicken aber nicht bloss 
auswarts, sondern wenn man in sie hinein blickt, so leuchten sie in das 
Innere dessen hinein, in die Seele dessen, dem diese Augen zu eigen 
sind, u. lassen uns ein ebenso klares, lichtes Herz erblicken u. ein ebenso 
reines Gemiith u. ein so lebendiges u. doch so ruhiges u. friedliche 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL II5 


Gedankenleben. Ja, die schGnen Augen, u. das was hinter ihnen ist, 
die schéne Seele, das schéne Herz,—sie sind mehr werth, als 
“Diamanten u. Perlen.”’ | 

In Deinem jiingsten Briefe offenbarst Du Dich ja als eine ganz 
enthusiastische Schwirmerin fiir Wagner’s Opern; insbesondere hat 
der Zannhduser iiber das gewohnliche prosaische Denken u. Empfin- 
den des Alltagslebens Dich emporgetragen, u. Du kannst fast nicht 
Worte genug finden, um Deine gehobene Seelenstimmung darzulegen. 
Musik im Allgemeinen ist freilich eine hohe und heilige Kunst,— 
immer vorausgesetzt, dass sie im Dienst des acht Schénen, des Erha- 
benen u. Lauternden steht, u. nicht dem oft rohen Geschmack uncul- 
tivierter Massen frodhnen will; dass sie das Leben und Denken weihet 
u. heiliget u. in reinere Regionen emporhebt, es aber nicht hinabzieht 
in den Staub und in den Schmutz. Das gilt ja tiberhaupt von jeder 
Kunstgattung, von der Poesie u. Rhetorik, von der Malerei u. Bild- 
hauerkunst. Die Kunst, die ware Kunst hat ungemein viel dazu 
beigetragen, die Menschheit aufwarts zu fiihren u. vorwarts zu bringen. 
Sie war ein Factor in der Geschichte, der nicht genug gewiirdigt werden 
kann. Aber ich méchte accentuiren, dass sie dchter Art sein muss, u- 
dass sie nicht bloss dusserlich als Kunst ercheinen darf. Ein Reime- 
schmied, der Alltagsgedanken in holperige oder auch in glatte Verse 
einzukleiden weiss, ist noch lange kein Dichter. Und ein gewéhn- 
licher Schildermaler, oder ein Farbenkleckser, der geistlose Menschen 
und Scenen in geistloser Weise darzustellen weiss, ist lange noch kein 
Maler. Aehnlich verhalt es sich in der Musik. Auch da gibt es 
Kunst u. Handwerk; veredelten Geschmack u. rohen Genuss; rei- 
nigende Macht u. niederzwingende Gewalt. Ich will nun gewiss nicht 
daran zweifeln, dass Wagner zu den achten Kiinstlern gehort, ja, dass 
er einst ein Bahnbrecher fiir eine neue Art von Musik gewesen ist, 
die immer mehr sich Anerkennung erringt u. Einfluss verschafit. Aber 
ich selber darf mir kein Urtheil anmassen. Was weiss unser einer 
von solchen Dingen? Ich bin in einer frithern Zeit aufgewachsen, da 
man noch zu den melodieenreichern Mozart u. Haydn u. Rossini 
verehrend emporschaute, und uns Alten ist die neuere Musik, die 
man noch vor kurzem die Musik der Zukunft nannte, die aber, wie es 
scheint, bereits zur Musik der Gegenwart geworden ist, weniger ver- 
stindlich. Ich habe auch einmal Tannhduser gehért u. auch noch 
etliche andere Opern von Wagner. Ich bewundere die reichere 
Orchestrierung in der neuern Musik. Davon hatten Mozart u. seine 


r16 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Zeitgenossen noch keine Ahnung. Aber dagegen waren sie, wie ich 
oben bereits sagte, melodieenreicher, die Arien waren sangbarer, u. 
der schlichte, einfache Hérer konnte ihnen leichter Verstandniss ent- 
gegenbringen. Doch ich muss schweigen. Ich verstehe nichts von 
diesen Sachen. Unser einer muss sich begniigen, an einem schénen 
Liede von einem Einzelnen oder von einem Chor vorgetragen, sich 
innig zu erfreuen, oder an der alten Zauberflite oder am Don Juan. 
Ihr Neuen,—ich wiirde sagen: Ihr Ueberfeinerten, wenn ich nicht 
fiirchten wiirde, dass ich missverstanden werden kénnte, —Ihr Neuen 
liebet mehr die gepfefferten Speisen und—die Wagner’sche Musik. 

Vielleicht gesellt sich, mir unbewusst, zu meinem Urtheil tiber 
Wagner noch ein kleines Vorurtheil gegen den Componisten, das nicht 
ganz zu iiberwinden ist. Vor nahezu 40 Jahren veroffentlichte Wagner 
eine Broschiire unter dem Titel: Das Judenthum in der Musik. In 
derselben offenbarte er sich als ein recht gehissiger Antisemit, als ein 
Mann der voller tiefer Abneigung ist gegen Alles, was mit Juden u. 
Judenthum irgendwie zusammenhangt. Er will in allem diesen, u. 
so auch in “‘jiidischer’’ Musik, nur Unedles, Gemeines finden, nichts 
was erhebt u. lautert; selbst die ausiibenden Musiker, die Virtuosen, 
die auf der Biihne oder im Concertsaal vor das Publikum treten, sind in 
seinen Augen keine wahren Jiinger der Kunst, sondern nur Menschen, 
die von eitler Ruhmsucht oder gemeiner Geldsucht erfiillt sind, etc., etc. 
Solche Gesinnungen aber, aus denen die Wagnerischen Vorurtheile 
herausgewachsen sind,—sind sie fiir uns beifallswerth? Muss nicht 
jeder Jude, der noch einigermassen “‘jiidisch-patriotisch” denkt,— 
wenn das Wort gestattet ist,—sich auflehnen gegen derartige 
Gedanken und sich ablehnend verhalten gegen derartige Urtheile? 
Felix Mendelssohn, der als Mensch u. als Musiker Hohe und Herrliche, 
der ideal gesinnte, reine, edle Mendelssohn, den zch wenigstens hoch 
iiber Wagner stelle,—ja, denke Dir nur, dieser Mendelssohn soll auch 
nur ein solcher Jude gewesen sein, der durch seine Musik den german- 
ischen Volksgeist vergiftet hat! Wenn ich auch iiber Musik an sich 
nur ein dilettantenhaft Urtheilender bin, so verstehe ich doch so viel, 
dass Wagner ein gesinnungsroher u. wenigstens in dieser Hinsicht tief 
zu stellender Mensch gewesen ist. 

Ich muss nun aufhéren. Fiir heute, denk’ ich, habe ich genug 
geplaudert. Griisse an Dich u. die 1. Mutter u. Schwester. 

Dein treuer Onkel 
B. FELSENTHAL 


TEACHER IN ISRAEL Ti 


Translation, p. 94 


Man wird endlich einmal auch in weitern Kreisen zu der Ueber- 
zeugung gelangen,» dass das, was man innerhalb der Judenheit 
‘‘Reform”’ nennt, nicht das Héchste, nicht das Schénste, nicht das 
Erstrebenswertheste u. Allerbeste ist, was es iiberhaupt in Israel gibt. 
Mir scheint es oft, dass die extremen u. ganz in’s Uferlose gehenden 
jiid. Reformbestrebungen in Amerika allgemach zum Untergang Israels 
u. seiner Religion hinleiten. . . . Meinen Sie nicht auch dass unsere 
Reformfreunde dem Judenthum “einen schénen Tod”’ bereiten ? 
















ve cone hl i bs an : 
CNMI ec 
Liha ate al “a 
2 Pub a Fis ‘ a 
i Le wee 4404 jee 7 ae a a tORiTIN r is) Shes Py ae A 


> 7 ~ a ~ : 7 J 7 vy pai ta Oya” } ! 
: | v: uae PAA | Lead f ee Hint: apelin (Rs 


‘ 4 = P J j A ar if : 
, é ee ate oP i p 4 i 
a iil Se CRM ae ea er ae \ ci Goh. 
Rov! LPs j an 5 + “a 7 | se A : 
‘ i’ * er “an +s i -. (a ‘ oii A 
| BBL eh rs lal ale i adie al aan 
i , J Hy ; re ‘‘ ‘ re ‘ 
Vey Ainepek . ya 
' i , 
* . ri ve = : 
' ‘ & 4 i “ 
a2 ; f “* 
i, ha 
i 
¥ : ' > om 
! Y 
~ 1 
“se } el, 
' ' } 5 ; . - 
he ‘ 
3 i ; 4 
y 
‘ A “J a _¥ 
: . A ‘ 
; i | ? ; j 
+ F a 1 ‘ ts ah 1 
f P 
, ‘ Pe te 
y ; 
. 
- af , 
i. ‘ : y : icles \y 
| ‘ ; ’ A) 
PF Pon hl fh} : “ 
‘ . 
j ei i 
/ Mi " ; ' 
! 
rT] = - ¥ - : 


; f °° . 
F Med ’ ; b ra 4 
* 
iff ’ i] 7 | af F 
yf 2 \ 
, i J i "¥\" 
uo ‘ ‘ ' 
' i ’ 7 
‘ 
’ : ; 
A " ) 
wy . en 7 
’ ta is - ue i tas it i 
iy? ; - : Ly Lad J r 
{ ‘ 7 : is F rf d 
; ' Whig oa y > 
if 6 ri j as ‘v AY RA , 
. . of q ne ad 
iy nt dy 
j si 
iA ae" : cA ' io Ee, tee se 
: ; , 5 a) ah 
wi aii [ 
Poal . Ce. , : , : ; 
o ’ 





YS * A ; Pr wif uy 7 i +e d » erase 7 ial windy 


Pics ve 4. x 





PAR elie 


SELECTED WRITINGS 





O mighty current of time, which carries the acquiescent forward 
rejoicing; while those who protest are nevertheless borne away against 
their will! O mighty tide of time! My soul greets thee exultingly. 
Spiritual darkness can never again reign on earth. ‘Tyranny is ban- 
ished forever.—Address before General Convention, I.O.B.B. 1868. 


WHEREFORE WE REJOICE? 


DELIVERED AT THE DEDICATION OF ZION 
TEMPLE, 1864 


The Lord hath chosen Zion; 
He hath desired it for his habitation. 
Teal eA, BECUZ My. 


A NEW congregation has been established in Israel; we 
have consecrated in this hour a new center for Jewish wor- 
ship, a new center for elevation of the spirit and ennoble- 
ment of the character from the Jewish standpoint. Our 
hearts swell with gratitude, and solemn, festive joy fills our 
souls. And truly, friends, we have reason for our joy. 
We rejoice as members of the race of Israel, we rejoice as 
friends of an enlightened movement within Judaism, and we 
rejoice over the founding of this congregation and the dedi- 
cation of this temple from the point of view also of all 
humanity. 

1. Aside from all else, even as sons of the ancient Hebrew 
race, there is ample reason for our pure and holy elevation 
of spirit. Is it not an inspiring thought that even here, in 
the distant West, almost at the frontier of civilization, 
another edifice has arisen, consecrated to the service of that 
God whom Israel has worshipped for more than three thou- 
sand years, dedicated to the teaching of those blessed and 
sublime and world-redeeming truths which arose in Israel in 
remote times and which have been cherished by Israel to 
this day—truths which in their essence and purity shall at 


1 Translated from Unsere Freude bei der Tempelwethe. 


I21 


122 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


some time be the supreme possession of all mankind? Are 
we not filled with pride and joy seeing for the first time 
a new Jewish congregation assembled here for divine 
service? O my fellow-Israelites, translate your emotions 
into thoughts, express them in language, and you will clearly 
recognize that your joy is fully justified. Not only on the 
heights of Moriah and at the foot of Carmel, on the shores 
of the Jordan and the sea of Tiberias, on the plains of 
Sharon and Jezreel are heard the teachings of Judaism. In 
every place where civilization has made its way, there are 
children of our race. Some have come of their own free will, 
some have been led by destiny—or let us rather say by the 
hand of God—and everywhere they remember with holy 
enthusiasm their mission to be bearers of those elevated 
doctrines which in their entirety are called the Jewish 
religion, to be promulgators of those pure truths before which 
ancient heathenism collapsed and before which the heathen- 
ism of our own time, the degrading cult of materialism, will 
sink into nothingness. It is not only the temple of Jeru- 
salem which is dedicated to the service of the One, Eternal, 
Spiritual Father of the Universe; numberless now are the 
places where the sublime word resounds which unites all 
Israel, and which today for the first time we have solemnly 
and fervently pronounced in this edifice: Hear, oh Israel, 
the Eternal is our God, the Eternal is One. 

And while we, as Jews proud of our Jewish consciousness, 
rejoice in the victorious onward march of our ancient Jewish 
faith, let us not refrain from also expressing our joy that it 
is not the Children of Israel alone who acknowledge the 
sublime character of our ancient laws and teachings, but 
that among all civilized nations the conviction of the divine 
truth and holiness and fitness of these laws and teachings is 
steadily gaining ground. ‘The more deeply they penetrate 


SELECTED WRITINGS 122 


into the consciousness of the world, the more fully is it 
recognized that as regards absolute truth and morality they 
are of infinitely. higher value than all the philosophical 
systems of the Greeks and all the laws of the Romans; and 
thus it has come to pass that the sublime truths proclaimed 
by the inspired prophets and psalmists of Israel are known 
and valued by others besides the descendants of Jacob. 
Wherever you may go, to the churches of Edom or the 
mosques of Ishmael, to the civilized countries of the West 
or the less civilized countries of the East, everywhere you 
will hear proclaimed the moral laws handed down on Mt. 
Sinai, the teachings promulgated on the fields of Moab; 
everywhere you will listen to the inspiriting songs of our 
psalmists, the soul-stirring speeches of our prophets; and 
you will recognize that these laws, these speeches, these 
psalms have been of the greatest influence in the ethical 
life of almost every nation having a history, that they have 
determined the lives even of those who call themselves ‘‘free- 
thinkers’? and who believe themselves completely emanci- 
pated from their rule. The source of these living waters is 
in Jacob, but from this source broad streams of enlighten- 
ment and morality have flowed to the West and to the East. 
They have borne, it is true, much pagan sediment, but have 
proved themselves notwithstanding beneficent agencies of 
light and love. They have washed away indeed whole 
mountain ranges of crude paganism from the face of the 
earth. And if thou, O Israel, remainest ever true to thyself 
and thy mission, then the streams that separated them- 
selves from thy waters in Galilee and Arabia, one carrying 
divine enlightenment west, the other east, will, as God- 
ordained instruments, lead the world to that great day when 
knowledge of God and love of man shall fill the whole earth 
as the waters cover the sea. 


124 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


The historical mission of Christianity and Mohammedan- 
ism has long ago been interpreted in this way by great 
Jewish thinkers, such as, for example, Judah ha-Levi, and 
Maimonides.’ And even in the early days of universal dark- 
ness and intolerance preachers and interpreters of the Scrip- 
tures attained to this exalted view, and acknowledged that 
“the truth came first from Sinai’’ but it “‘enlightens also 
Seir’”’—Seir, the home of Edom, being a symbol, in our 
older writings, of the Nazarene faith; also “it radiates from 
Paran’’—Paran, the home of Ishmael, being a symbol for 
the teachings of Mohammed.? And shall not we who have 
emerged from the ghettoes into which fanaticism and 
intolerance have imprisoned our fathers, and likewise 
from the confining walls of narrow religious views—shall not 
we who have penetrated all strata of society, all phases of 
life, all branches of science, and all spheres of art, shall not 
we exult over this dominion of Jewish ideas in the spiritual 
life of all mankind? We remember with deep affection the 
grandeur of ancient Jerusalem, but we do not share the wish 
to return to conditions that represented the mere beginning 
of development; we cherish instead the joyful hope of seeing 
the entire world one Jerusalem of enlightenment and virtue. 
The history of mankind points unmistakably to the fullest 
realization of this hope. Without passing through the phase 
of a militant church in the worldly sense, the persecuted 
faith will be victorious through sheer force of its divine 
teachings. ‘Therefore we rejoice and give voice to our glad- 
ness. Our Jewish hearts beat high when, envisaging the 
future, the glorious picture unrolls itself before our mind’s 
eye. See! all mankind—countless millions, all races, nations, 


* Cf. Kuzari, 4, 23; H. Melachim, 11, 4. 


The term was used in this sense even before Aben Ezra’s time, as witness 
his commentary to Deut. 33:2; cf. also Albo’s Ikkarim, 1, 20, and other passages. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 125 


tongues, religions, not only Israel and Edom and Ishmael, 
not only Shem and Ham and Japhet, but all the children 
of men are assembled, radiant in the light of the knowledge 
of God, crowned with the resplendent crown of universal 
virtue and brotherly love. One God, one humanity, all 
men brothers, and Israel the first-born among them! Israel, 
who led the way carrying aloft the banner with the flaming 
inscription, Adonai Elohenu! ‘The Eternal is our God!” 
And the nations shout aloud to him whom they formerly 
derided and whom they now look upon as their honored 
elder brother, Sema Yisrael! ‘Hear, oh Israel, the Eternal 
is also our God! the Eternal is One!’ 

Our thoughts, dear friends, have carried us into the 
distant future in which the whole of mankind will unite in 
one single grand temple of God. Let us return to our own 
time and to this young Zion Congregation. The congrega- 
tion and its temple are signs of both the inward steadfastness 
and the outward spread of the power of the Jewish spirit. 
Where only a few decades ago were the hunting grounds of 
the Indians, another Jewish House of God has arisen. 
Where only a short while ago savage tribes swung their 
murderous tomahawks in fratricidal strife, descendants of 
Jacob now testify to their belief in the fatherhood of God, 
the brotherhood of man, and to their belief that man is made 
in the image of God. Where a few years ago barbarism 
reigned, intent upon nothing but the satisfaction of the 
material wants of life, men now strive after truth, enlighten- 
ment, morality. Itis for this that joy and gratitude fill our 
hearts, it is for this that we sing hymns of praise. If the 
echo of our voices could reach our brethren beyond the seas, 
they would say, ‘‘From the uttermost part of the earth have 
we heard songs” (Isa. 24:16). And if they were to inquire of 
us, ‘‘Why this rejoicing? Why these hymns of praise ?” 


126 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


we would answer, “‘We have reason enough for praise and 
for gratitude and for gladness of heart. For see! Israel 
lives! Jacob is not dead! he lives on in his children, as this 
new congregation testifies; Judaism lives, as this new temple 
testifies. See! here is a new Zion whence the Torah shall 
go forth, a new Zion chosen by God for a home.” 

2. Yes, friends, we rejoice because another congregation, 
another temple, has been added to the countless numbers 
of Jewish congregations and houses of worship. But we 
have a special source of joy in the thought that here in this 
temple Judaism will be preached in its purity, that here its 
divine teachings will be cherished for their power to gladden 
the heart, enlighten the mind, and ennoble the spirit. The 
precious gold of our religion is covered with the dust of cen- 
turies: it is for us to remove the dust and restore the gold 
in radiant splendor. What is eternal and essential in our 
religion lies buried beneath a dead weight of ceremonies 
which have lost all meaning: it is for us to remove this dead 
and deadening mass, to bring new life into religion and new 
religion into life. To our pure Jewish faith superstition is 
attaching itself as with leaden weights and is trying to 
drag it down to dark and low-lying regions: it is for us to 
oppose with all our might both the consuming fire of super- 
stition and the icy cold of materialism and to do all in our 
power to make the light and warmth of the sun of Judaism 
shine in all its glory and splendor in this edifice and on this 
congregation. The current of further development, the 
trend toward modification of external forms according to 
time and place and circumstance, is hemmed in by an iron 
wall of opposition, an iron wall which, according to a Tal- 
mudic expression,’ separates God and Israel since the de- 


t Cf. Berachoth, 32 b. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 127 


struction of the Temple. It is for us to release the stagnant 
mass, so that its living current may again bring blessing to 
Israel and all mankind. | 

Judaism is capable of unlimited development—this is our 
conviction. Judaism must constantly adapt itself in its 
outward forms to time and circumstance—this is our motto. 
To be sure, we must remain upon firm foundation and direct 
our course toward a clearly recognized goal. The founda- 
tion is: the belief in one eternal, premundane, and tran- 
scendental God and Ruler of all things; the belief in the 
destiny of mankind to realize the purest morality in thought 
and action and in its progress toward the highest attainable 
heights of knowledge and love and virtue; the belief in the 
mission of Israel to be exemplar, teacher, and guide of man- 
kind along the path to the Alpine heights of enlightenment 
and virtue. The goal—we have already described it in 
indicating the unshakable foundation of our faith. 

And how does this our conviction accord with Holy Writ 
and with all that great and significant literature which the 
Jewish national spirit in its fervent love of God has brought 
forth? Let us remember that these writings are but mile- 
stones on the road of Judaism’s progress—noble, impressive, 
but milestones only; in largest part they mark the comple- 
tion of but a portion of the journey, not its final goal. Some 
of these writings, including a part of the Hebrew Scriptures, 
do indeed mark the final and farthest goal of man. Partic- 
ularly with regard to the Mosaic Law we would say: The 
spirit of the ancient Biblical laws and institutions is eternal, 
their aim the highest which it is possible for any human 
being, however divinely inspired, to conceive. But Israel did 
not at once climb the heights. While their great lawgiver 
stood on the summit, they, the people, remained in the 


128 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


valley, or even in the abyss. To guide and elevate them, it 
was necessary to create laws and institutions of an educative 
character. The purpose of these laws once fulfilled, their 
authority ceased, and others, in keeping with the altered 
conditions of life, had to be created for the furtherance of 
the aims of Israel and of humanity. This must ever be the 
guiding principle in reform. We must take heed, however, 
that we do not follow the wrong path and that we keep our 
aim steadfastly in view; to this end we must turn again 
and again to our Holy Scriptures, must fill ourselves with 
their spirit and be guided by their spirit. 

The spirit, not the letter! Of what consequence is it for 
our religious thinking and doing whether Moses wrote the 
books named after him or not? whether the authorship of 
Isaiah is to be ascribed to one man or two? whether the 
Psalms of David are in truth his or another’s? However 
great the number of contradictions, interpolations, and omis- 
sions which may yet be pointed out by Biblical critics, even 
if they brought us to the conclusion that Moses and David 
and Elijah were mythical personages only, who never existed 
in reality, it would not trouble us. We would not there- 
fore reject or condemn criticism, for criticism which labors 
honestly to arrive at the truth and which does not purposely 
undermine what is venerable and holy is deserving of all 
honor and respect. Our Judaism does not depend upon 
belief in the existence of Moses, but on belief in the existence 
of God. Our religion does not demand belief in the holiness 
of the letter of the Bible; it demands that men strive them- 
selves after holiness. Our religion is not endangered through 

facts incorrectly narrated in the Bible, but it would be endan- 
_ gered if we were to forget or deny the fact that Israel has been 
chosen to be a priest-people among the nations. A religion 


SELECTED WRITINGS 129 


like ours stands firm, whatever the discoveries of Biblical 
criticism. For its ultimate sources are to be found in our spir- 
itual nature and in the entire history of Judaism. But the 
most sublime and noble among the written evidences of Juda- 
ism is—let us never tire of repeating it—the Holy Bible, 
and always and always we will return to it for spiritual 
refreshment and regeneration. 

Our later writings are also of inestimable value to us, 
when we rightly understand them as the expression of a dis- 
tinct phase of evolution. In the maxims of our ancient 
sages and in the accounts of the lives of Israelites of former 
times there is material from which our own religious life may 
be vastly enriched. And we are in duty bound to turn to our 
voluminous post-Biblical literature for the additional reason 
that we find therein the ultimate source of countless details 
of our present-day religious practice. Viewing broadly the 
history of Judaism, we see that it divides itself into two great 
epochs. ‘The first of these is the Biblical epoch; of this the 
great fundamental work is the Bible. The Apocrypha and 
a few other writings which have been lost amplify the 
Biblical contents. The second, the Talmudic-Rabbinical 
epoch, has as its great fundamental work the Talmud in its 
various parts. Upon this the vast rabbinical literature of 
the Middle Ages was based. And since we have by no means 
yet completely emerged from this epoch, it is an absolute 
necessity for us to study Talmudic and rabbinical sources if 
we wish to understand the religious conditions of the present. 
But Judaism is clearly entering upon a third period of its 
history—a period which had its inception with Moses 
Mendelssohn and of which one characteristic is that it 
endeavors to emancipate the individual from the rigid 
authority of the past. In consequence the sayings and 


130 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


opinions of the rabbis are not always to be quoted as author- 
ity, but are often to be considered in their polemical aspects 
only. We pay deepest reverence to the Mosaic and Tal- 
mudic and rabbinical laws and ordinances, but cannot allow 
them always to determine our lives. 

Possessing such views, it is plain that we cannot wish for 
the restoration of, let us say, the sacrificial cult. If it was 
justified in an earlier stage of civilization, it is at the present 
time utterly foreign to our religious ideas. Our idea of 
sacrifice is that of the prophets and psalmists and not that 
of the Mosaic Law, and we strive to realize it in thought and 
deed in ways vastly different from those of ancient Jerusalem. 
We no longer wish to retain the institution which provides 
that certain religious duties are to be performed only by 
members of certain families. During the lifetime of Moses, 
such an institution was no doubt necessary, since the 
people as a whole proved themselves (doubtless to the 
inexpressible sorrow of the lawgiver) unfit for the high task 
placed upon them at the foot of Mt. Horeb. As for our- 
selves, we joyfully assume the dignity and also the burden 
of universal priesthood. Willingly we take upon ourselves 
the duties which are implied in the prophet’s pledge, “Ye 
shall be named the priests of the Lord” (Isa. 61:6). Gladly 
we admit that Judaism is not confined to a particular country, 
nor to a particular people, nor to a particular period and 
stage of culture. We would cast aside without hesitation 
those remnants of antiquated oriental and nationalistic ideas 
and customs which still remain a part of Judaism today. 
Above all we refuse to acknowledge that the essence of 
religion resides in those thousands of petty statutes which 
encumbered the religious life in former times and have been 
left as an inheritance to ours. On the contrary, we prefer 


SELECTED WRITINGS 131 


to leave to the individual the outward expression of his 
religious thinking. For religious acts are moral acts having 
spiritual value only when they are free; performed under 
compulsion of religious law, they are without effect and 
have no relation to the inner life. 

Whenever circumstances require us to act as a congre- 
gation, we shall be guided, as far as conditions permit, by 
these principles. Where we cannot as yet put our prin- 
ciples fully into practice, we shall at least work toward their 
realization, calmly and with consideration for those who 
think differently from ourselves, but without hypocrisy or 
equivocation. At all times and under all circumstances we 
must have the courage of our convictions. 

Through such endeavors, it is our hope to make ideal 
Judaism real in this congregation. It is our hope that here 
religion will be such as the psalmist describes it: restoring the 
soul, making wise the simple, rejoicing the heart, enlighten- 
ing the eyes, and righteous altogether. It is our earnest 
hope that the seed sown in this place will fall into our hearts 
and take root and blossom forth beautifully in righteous 
thoughts and words and deeds. 

Because we have assembled here to consecrate this house 
to such a purpose, our hearts overflow with gladness and our 
mouths sing praises of the Lord. And when our brethren 
in far-away lands exclaim, “‘ From the uttermost part of the 
earth have we heard songs” (Isa. 24:16), and when they ask 
of us, ‘“‘Why, you Israelites on the shore of distant Lake 
Michigan, why this special rejoicing, why this extreme 
exaltation ?’”’ we will answer, ‘‘It is not only because we have 
built a new Jewish house of worship, but because it is the 
temple of a Reform congregation; because in this place we 
shall endeavor to serve what is eternal, unchanging, essen- 


De BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


tial, and not that which is transitory, impermanent, and 
incidental; because here we shall endeavor to keep the 
highest purposes of Judaism steadfastly in view.”’ 

As yet there are not very many of such houses of worship 
in Israel. They are still oases in the desert. But we per- 
celve with joy that there is new life stirring in very many 
congregations, and that new desire for improvement of 
religious conditions prevails. In very many places both 
laymen and rabbis are earnestly desirous of altering the out- 
ward forms of worship so as to bring them into harmony 
with the time and are eager to clarify the doctrinal content 
of our religion so as to make it square with the achievements 
of science and the advance of culture. Hundreds of congre- 
gations and thousands of our brethren are striving, in all the 
aspects of their lives, to apply the divine commandment pro- 
hibiting double weights and measures: they do not wish 
longer to be sons of the present age in their daily lives and in 
their scientific views and their ordinary thinking, and sons 
of the Middle Ages in the pulpit and in their books of prayer. 
They are striving to do away with the fatal discord between. 
life and doctrine, past and present, and to substitute con- 
sistency and harmony. ‘The effort deserves all praise—if 
it does not halt midway, does not content itself with a few 
inadequate changes, but instead pushes forward with youth- 
ful enthusiasm toward the realization of high aims clearly 
conceived, and if it does not rest until these aims have been 
fully realized. ‘They go from strength to strength. Every 
one of them appeareth before God in Zion”’ (Ps. 84:8). 

But, alas! one is aware often of aims not high, but low, 
aims which are determined not by religious motives but by 
vanity or the prevailing fashion. We, dear friends, are 
inaugurating a divine service which cannot fail to satisfy, 
by reason both of its form and its content, every thoughtful 


SELECTED WRITINGS 133 


member of our faith who has kept pace with the times. But 
‘it is not enough to have attained an enlightened religious 
attitude. This is the seed but not the fruit. Let us labor 
together that from this seed issue the noble fruit of worthy 
thoughts and deeds. 

A few years ago we made bold here in this city to interpret 
Judaism from the standpoint of children of the modern age; 
a voice called into the religious wilderness. There were 
many who spoke then in angry opposition to us; others 
listened with indifference, and still others refused to believe 
that any result would follow from our efforts. But we con- 
tinued steadily to sow our seed, certain that sooner or later 
the harvest would be reaped. With the Prophet we said, 
‘Behold, the former things are come to pass, and new things 
do I declare. Before they spring forth, I tell you of them”’ 
(Isa. 42:9). And behold, in this short time the harvest has 
ripened; there are now in this city two sister-congregations, 
inspired by the same ideas and animated with the same spirit. 
A few decades hence and there will be a great number of such 
congregations. After a dark night the dawn comes slowly, 
but ever higher and higher rises the golden sun, ever clearer 
and brighter grow its rays, and ever farther and farther its 
light is spread. The golden light of the morning sun shines 
upon our Zion Congregation. May the Eternal choose this 
Zion too for His abode! 

3. Thus, dear friends, we have ample reason, as members 
of Israel and as children of the present, to let ourselves be 
carried this day upon the wings of consecrated thought and 
sanctified feeling into those higher regions where dwell the 
eternally divine and the eternally human. But our joy is 
further justified from the standpoint of the spiritual welfare 
of all humanity. This temple and this congregation are 
evidence that not all men serve gold and pleasure; there are 


134 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


many who recognize higher values in life. It is a fact which 
cannot be denied that the overwhelming majority of our 
contemporaries take no interest in things of the soul, but 
devote all their thoughts to material realities. ‘“‘What do 
we care,” they say, “for things which cannot be perceived 
by the senses, which cannot be weighed and measured, 
which cannot be turned into gold? What do we care for 
knowledge if it does not improve the conditions of practical 
life? What to us are religion and religious institutions ? 
They only reduce our material possessions, lessen our joy 
in life, diminish our pleasures. What to us are the sublime 
aspirations which people endeavor to cultivate through 
prayer and hymn and sermon, what to us this talk of char- 
acter and the moral life which one hears in temple and 
synagogue? Religion has long been obsolete; religious 
truth—a chimera; morality—a delusion; freedom of the will 
—a meaningless concept. That only is real which is evi- 
dent to the senses, which may be seen and heard and tasted 
and felt; life, property, pleasure, are real; the god whom 
we worship is gold.” Yes, dear friends, such sentiments are 
expressed every day in street and market-place, in home and 
office, from professor’s chair and popular platform, in ephem- 
eral journals and in the serious works of recognized scholars. 
Our generation would go to ruin speedily enough along this 
steep downward path if there were not a wholesome reaction, 
a teshuba, to which, in these days of the teshuba,? we ought 
to give our serious attention. We earnestly, solemnly, 
repeat: Spiritual and moral ruin must ensue where men take 
such a materialistic view of life. He to whom the words 
God, spirit, freedom, are empty sounds, signifying nothing, 
is robbed of all incentive to noble aspiration and moral 


‘This sermon was preached on New Year’s Day, the first of the Ten Days of 
Repentance. The Hebrew word for “‘repentance”’ is teshuba, “return.” 


SELECTED WRITINGS 135 


living; everything low and contemptible and mean in human 
impulse and thought and conduct finds easy entrance into 
his soul. And if you remind me that there are many persons 
of excellent character who deny the existence of God and 
spirit and who have enthroned the sorry idol Necessity in 
place of that freedom of the will which is the root of all 
-morality and all human dignity, I will answer, these men 
are protected by the fulness of their knowledge and their 
good habits of thought and life from moral decadence; 
keeping away from everything that is low and base and 
immoral, their intellectual assumptions remain without influ- 
ence on their character. But the masses, lacking their 
education and culture, will draw the strict logical conclusion 
from the premises, will argue from the non-existence of God 
the non-existence of all moral obligation, and will act 
accordingly. 

Friends, we are not blind to the one-sidedness and even 
the danger of that spiritual tendency which expresses itself 
in aversion to all that is earthly and material, in ascetic 
practices and mystical incursions into supernatural regions 
which the human spirit is unable to penetrate, will forever 
be unable to penetrate, so long as human limitations remain 
what they are. Nor are we in the least blind to the inesti- 
mable value of those sciences which further the ends of 
earthly life, which aim to satisfy the needs of men, lighten 
their burdens, lessen their cares, increase their pleasures, 
their comfort, their well-being. We do not sanctimo- 
niously condemn the impulse to acquire worldly goods or to 
seek innocent enjoyment, but agree without hesitation that 
protection of one’s self and one’s family against want is a 
natural instinct of human nature. We believe, furthermore, 
that wealth concentrated in the hands of individuals can 
be the source of great benefit to society—if those who possess 


136 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


= 


it are men of character who have the interests of the com- — 


munity at large at heart. Trade and industry may be 
advanced and the well-being of great numbers of people 
increased where wealth is rightly used. 

Pleasure, likewise, has its place in life. It is no gloomy, 
puritanical spirit which animates Judaism. ‘‘He [did not 


create the earth] as a waste, He formed it to be inhabited,” ° 


says the Prophet (Isa. 45:18). And with few exceptions, 
the teachers of Judaism are in accord with the author of 
Kuzari, when he says (2, 50): ‘The humility and contri- 
tion of the holy day do not bring thee any nearer to God 
than does the joy of the Sabbath and the festival, if thy 
joy comes from a sound and sober heart.’ For all that, 
we do not forget that body is less than soul, that matter is 
less than spirit, that the life of pleasure is lower than the 
moral life. Not gold nor pleasure nor physical well-being, 
not fine houses nor splendid raiment nor choice food and 
wine represent the highest good of man; there are higher 
values, more exalted aims than these. Nor are they the 
only realities; the spirit, too, is real, the effort to satisfy the 
demands of the spirit is real, and it is a crude and sensual 
materialism which looks upon the body and its needs as the 
only true reality. ‘To be sure, there is also a false idealism 
which forgets the body and its claims and loses itself in 
mystical states of mind and in spiritual effort which has 
no relation to practical life. But religion must not be 
confounded with this false idealism. If religion were indeed 
what the materialists say it is, a system of teachings about 
supernatural things of which we mortals can know nothing 
but which we must blindly accept, they would be justi- 
fied in declaring it obsolete. But this is a false concep- 
tion. Religion is the aspiration of the spirit toward high 
and sublime ideals; the effort of man to overcome his lower 


SELECTED WRITINGS 137 


nature; the desire to ennoble the sentiments and purify the 
feelings, to direct the will toward what is noble and virtuous, 
to inspire and kindle it with devotion to all that is good, to 
enlighten the mind and free it from darkness and superstition. 
An indestructible element in human nature is religion, and 
till the very last day men will seek to satisfy their religious 
impulses. Such is religion in general. Jewish religion, or 
Judaism, is religion upon a Jewish-historical basis, nourished 
by the recollection of our race history and by Jewish doctrine, 
and inspired by those eternal truths which were first pro- 
claimed by Israel, but which have been carried far beyond 
its racial borders and have become the possession in more or 
less pure form of a large part of mankind. 

To the service of this religion, you, members of Zion 
Congregation, have dedicated this house. You have thereby 
given testimony that you are not dominated by one-sided 
and false materialism, but that you value rightly the higher 
possessions of mankind—enlightenment of the spirit, nobility 
of the heart, religion, virtue, the faith of your fathers. You 
have shown thereby that you are not only true Israelites 
and adherents of a purified Judaism, but are also high- 
minded and idealistic human beings. Truly, where aspira- 
tions and feelings such as yours seek to express themselves, 
in noble endeavor and righteous deeds, where they do not 
die down like a fire of straw but endure, there is a Zion of 
God’s choosing, an abode of the Divine Spirit. 

These are the reasons, dear friends, for the joy and 
enthusiasm of this hour. We are Israelites, and nothing 
that concerns Israel leaves us unmoved—hence our joy in 
adding a new Jewish house of worship to the thousands of 
others that exist. We are friends and adherents of Reform 
Judaism, and nothing that concerns the triumphant progress 
of this enlightened movement leaves us indifferent—hence 


138 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


our joy in dedicating a temple consecrated to the Judaism of 
the present and the future. We are human beings, and 
nothing that concerns mankind is foreign to us—hence our 
joy in finding men and women here who do not bow the knee 
to the modern Baal, but who look upon God and freedom, 
religion and morality, as ideal and at the same time real 
possessions. Joy, pure joy, fills my heart and yours. May 
such joy bless you always, now and evermore. Amen. 


THE ORIGIN OF JUDAISM AND ITS 
oR eh ROCH =: 
1867 


ONE of the characteristics of modern historical and phil- 
osophical science is its emphasis upon the study of origins. 
This interest in the sources of historic phenomena and phys- 
ical life is proof of the soundness of scientific research at 
the present time; for an understanding of the origin of any 
living thing, anything subject to law, sheds much light upon 
its further development. For example, the correct under- 
standing of the origin of Christianity is, as it were, a lumi- 
nous torch by the aid of which the entire road traveled by 
Christianity during the eighteen centuries of its history is 
brought more clearly into view. For the sake, therefore, 
of pure science as well as of daily life it is of very great 
importance to examine, from the most diverse points of view, 
into the beginnings of that great religion which holds sway 
throughout the Western world. 

As with Christianity, so with language and languages; 
learned scholars—Grimm, Renan, Max Miiller, and others— 
are laboring zealously in this field and bringing material of 
untold value to the light of day. Kuhn, Schwarz, Del- 
briick, are instructing us as to the sources of mythology, 
Darwin as to the origin of species in the animal and plant 
world; yes, the scientists of today are even audacious enough 
to attempt to penetrate the primordial mists in their search 
after the beginnings, not only of our earth and the life upon 
it, but of the entire universe as well. 


t Translated from Ueber den Ursprung des Judenthums und die Epochen des- 
selben. An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, Chicago. 


139 


140 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


It shall be our common task, ladies and gentlemen, to 
consider the origin of a great historical phenomenon of 
special interest to many of us, because it concerns a religion 
which is ours by birth and confession. How did Judaism 
come into being? ‘This is the question before us. 

But first of all let us clearly understand the nature of 
Judaism. What zs Judaism? A conception of Judaism 
based on the assumption that the Judaism of the entire 
past is identical with Judaism as it is professed and practiced 
today would be utterly false. For the Judaism of 1867 
differs essentially (and not only in externals and minor 
details) from the Judaism of 1767; and the Judaism of the 
last two thousand years differs essentially from the Judaism of 
early Biblical times or from that of the Jewish national period. 
Three great epochs of Judaism may be distinguished— 
Mosaic, Rabbinic, and Modern (or Prophetic) Judaism, as 
they may be designated. The element common to all three 
and constant through all changes is monotheism, the belief 
in a spiritual, transcendental, premundane and only God, who 
is the Creator of the universe, the conscious and uncondi- 
tioned Ruler of nature and of history. 

This belief, which formed the great central idea around 
which the Jewish church was built, the rallying point for 
its adherents, arose in remote antiquity among the an- 
cestors of the Jewish people. The gradual development 
of Jewish religious life in its outward aspect, the entire 
complex of concepts and ideas contending at various 
periods for domination within Judaism—these are matters 
of history. 

For our purpose, which is briefly to characterize Judaism 
in its various epochs, it may perhaps be well to reverse the 
chronology and consider first Modern, then Talmudic- 
Rabbinical, and finally Mosaic Judaism. 





SELECTED WRITINGS 141 


In this our own time, we see a vast change taking place 
within Judaism. ' A kind of fermentation is vigorously going 
on, and its results are in part already evident to us. If you 
hesitate to call this mighty spiritual fermentation a revolu- 
tion, you will at any rate not deny that an exceedingly 
significant phase is occurring in the spiritual evolution of 
the Jews of the civilized world. 

In the terms of Christian theology, Christianity has 
usually been called a religion of love, and Judaism a religion 
of law. Naturally we do not admit that Christianity has 
a greater claim to the title of a religion of love than Judaism; 
for, in its teachings as in the life of its adherents, Judaism has 
given evidence that it lays quite as much weight upon love 
as does Christianity—at times, indeed, even more. On the 
other hand, the official pronouncements of the Christian 
church and the life and practice of Christian peoples during 
fifteen centuries have proved the designation ‘‘religion of 
love”’ to be a decidedly hyperbolic one—to be taken, indeed, 
with a grain of salt. The sentimental, otherworldly, and 
practically inapplicable sayings and commandments of the 
gospels in regard to love have been entirely ignored by the 
adherents of Christianity, except by a few spiritual-minded 
enthusiasts. But if in the light of historical facts we must 
deny that Christianity has an exclusive right to be called a 
“religion of love,” we are at the same time obliged to admit 
that Judaism, in its second, its Talmudic-Rabbinical phase, 
has always been, and is to this day, a religion of law. Of this 
we are living witnesses, for the adherents of Talmudic 
Judaism are still very numerous. They have great and 
flourishing congregations and, in some localities, eminent 
protagonists who would by no means concede that they are 
trying to revitalize the mummy of a dead-and-gone stage 
of development. Throughout the Middle Ages was not the 


142 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Law the predominant force in Judaism? Can it be denied 
that every movement and every thought of the “rabbinic”’ 
Jew is prescribed ? every step from the cradle to the bier, 
from the dawn of day to the dead of night? At the very 
beginning, indeed, of the Shulchan Aruch, the book of 
rabbinic law, ordinances and regulations are set down con- 
cerning the washing of hands, the putting on of garments 
sacred or profane, etc. The foundation for this Judaism 
of laws and statutes was laid in pre-Maccabean times—it has 
been twenty centuries in the building—and now, what Gothic 
cathedral, with all its thousands of arabesques and scrolls 
and fantastic gargoyles, can be compared with the gigantic 
spiritual edifice of Talmudic Judaism, where “‘law has been 
heaped upon law, line upon line, here a little, there a little” ? 
The great European cathedrals are the results of the labors 
of centuries, but the stratifications of Talmudism have been 
superimposed, one upon the other, during two millennia. 
Upon the foundation stones laid by the sopherim of the pre- 
Maccabean period was built the superstructure—the work, 
successively, of the tannaim, the amoraim (or post-Mishnaic 
teachers of the Talmud), the saboraim (or redactors of the 
Talmud), the geonim (whose period reaches into the eleventh 
century of our common era), the rabbis of the Middle Ages, 
and so forth to the present time. (Let me say, in passing, 
that in certain aspects of Judaism as in other fields of thought 
and activity, in political life and in the church, we are still 
living in the Middle Ages.) 

It should be remembered also that this gigantic edifice of 
Talmudic Judaism has not been built by architects of one city 
or one country alone. On the banks of the Euphrates and the 
Tigris, the Vistula and the Nile, men have labored upon it. 

Talmudism, besides being an historical necessity, was, dur- 
ing many centuries, further justified by the hold it had upon 


SELECTED WRITINGS 143 


the people, and by the fact that it was surrounded by a halo 
of sanctity and in consequence had an ennobling influence 
upon life. The entire system was based upon the sound idea 
that religion as a sanctifying power must guide men in all 
relations of life and must not be considered (as many of our 
“enlightened” spirits appear to consider it) as having a 
claim upon men only at certain times and in certain places— 
as, for instance, on Sabbaths and holidays and at the hour 
of death and in places of worship and houses of mourning, 
to be quietly disregarded in business and in the give-and- 
take of daily life, where indeed it may be regarded as an 
intruder. 

In the course of time, however, this multitude of Tal- 
mudic laws became thoroughly ossified, as was inevitable; 
laws and ordinances came to be observed in a purely mechan- 
ical way, and thus they lost completely their spiritual and 
moral effect. In this state of affairs, a change was bound 
to come, and out of Talmudic Judaism developed Modern 
Judaism, which to a large extent has already made its 
spiritual conquests and to which, without a doubt, the future 
belongs. 

What is the distinguishing characteristic of Modern Juda- 
ism? Emancipation from fixed religious observances! I 
repeat, from fixed religious observances, from lifeless 
mechanical ceremonies! The spirit of Modern Judaism 
may perhaps be described with sufficient exactness in these 
words: Only such laws, Biblical or post-Biblical, as still 
retain the power to elevate and inspire the mind and heart, 
and influence thought and conduct, deserve to survive; laws 
which have lost their power to sanctify have ceased to be of 
binding force. This, however, is merely the negative aspect _ 
of Modern Judaism. On its positive side it consists in the 
preservation of the sublime spiritual teachings of the proph- 


144 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


ets and in the endeavor to render them fruitful for our 
life and the life of the world. ‘To this end suitable ceremonies 
are necessary; these are in part to be preserved and in part 
to be created anew. ‘‘ Abolition of ceremonies”’ is therefore 
a false motto for Reform. ‘‘The Torah has not been given 
to angels,” but to men who perceive through their senses and 
who need ceremonies as an aid to spiritual life—only the 
ceremonies must be fit for their purpose. 

If you ask me now if the kernel of Reform Judaism does 
indeed consist entirely in this, if it is not quite as much a 
matter of the evolution and clarification of dogmas as it is 
of rites or freedom from rites, I will answer, “‘Such a ques- 
tion in the mouth of a Christian would not surprise me. 
For Christians naturally assume that the Jewish intellectual 
. currents of our time run parallel with their own, and that 
the circumstances are similar in the two religions. But we 
Jews have no redemption by faith, no original sin, no elec- 
tion by grace, no vicarious atonement, no mediator, no 
trinity, to affirm or deny. ‘There is, in truth, no problem 
to be dealt with save that of the authority of the Law.” 

I do not doubt that among you who sit before me there 
are many who at this moment are silently opposing my 
contention. “Surely,” you would say, ‘‘there are also 
matters of dogmatic controversy in Judaism. Will a mes- 
siah arise from the House of David, reunite the Jews now 
dispersed over the world, and lead them back into Palestine ? 
Will the dead be resurrected? Will the Mosaic sacrificial 
cult be restored ?” 

Opinions on these and similar points diverge widely, it 1s 
true, even in our own day. But it would be a mistake to 
point to this divergence as the fundamental cause of differ- 
ence between the religious parties. For Judaism never has 
had any fixed dogmas, and even in the darkest period of the 


Se 


SELECTED WRITINGS I45 


Middle Ages there existed a measure of spiritual freedom. 
No one was excommunicated for his doubts—only for 
offenses against the Law. Nor would a genuinely Orthodox 
rabbi today disqualify a candidate for the office of shochet 
for disbelief alone, but only for definite disregard of this or 
that rabbinical or Biblical ordinance. One Rabbi Hillel 
(not the fanna of that name but an amora of the fourth 
century) once said openly that Israel need not expect the 
advent of a personal Messiah; that the prophetical passages 
alluding to him refer to King Hezekiah. Hillel’s, to be sure, 
was only a solitary voice, and his words met with vigorous 
opposition. Even today the great majority of the Jews 
believe in a personal Messiah. The belief of the majority, 
however, is beside the question. I am merely attempting 
to demonstrate the fact that some measure of doctrinal 
freedom existed. ‘To be sure the attempt has several times 
been made to formulate Articles of Faith and give the syna- 
gogue a creed. Maimonides came nearest to succeeding 
with the Thirteen Articles which he laid down in a passage 
of his commentary to the Mishnah. But notwithstanding 
the great and well-deserved esteem in which he was and is 
still held, he did not altogether succeed, but met with con- 
siderable opposition even among his own contemporaries. 
Rabbi Abraham ben David, for example, declared it pre- 
sumptuous, from the Orthodox point of view, to attempt to 
force the doctrinal contents of Judaism and the Bible into 
a series of formulations. Others opposed the attempt from 
the religio-philosophical standpoint. Albo, in his book 
Ikkarim, formulated three basic Articles of Faith; other men 
set up other dogmatic systems; but not a single one of them 
was finally and definitely accepted. Being thus untram- 
meled by a créed, the Jewish thinkers of the Middle Ages 
differed markedly in their dogmatic views. Many of them 


146 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


were indeed exceedingly bold for their time. Thus, to 
mention one example, as long ago as the fourteenth century, 
Rabbi Levi ben Gershon rejected miracles and the doctrine 
of creation out of nothing, and asserted the eternity of mat- 
ter. Orthodox rabbis (even some of the wiser among them) 
denounced his ‘‘battle against God,” as they called it, and 
accused him of heresy. Nevertheless there were those who 
shared his views. 

At this point you may perhaps expect me to refer to 
Spinoza. But notwithstanding our justifiable pride in this 
incomparable thinker, I should be guilty of deception were 
I to mention him in this connection. Spinoza was a Jew 
only in a limited sense. He was the son of Jewish parents. 
In his youth he had stored his mind with the spiritual 
treasures of Judaism. And it is incontrovertible that one 
who is born a Jew can no more renounce his Jewishness than 
a German can cease to be a German, should he so desire. 
To be a Jew remains his fate. If we consider Judaism, how- 
ever, in its spiritual sense, we have no right to claim Spinoza 
asa Jew. Judaism gives us great spiritual latitude, but, if it 
has no Articles of Faith, it has a definite content of faith, 
the chief element of which, as has already been said, is 
this: One God exists, eternal, premundane, transcendental, 
spiritual, and holy, who is, to use the language of Heine, 
not bound hand and foot to blind natural causation, but who 
has His elbows free for action. Against this basic concept 
of Judaism, Spinoza, who was not, indeed, an atheist, but 
an acosmist, Spinoza, the founder of modern Pantheism, 
who more truly than Kant may be called the arch- 
iconoclast, the Robespierre in the world of thought, turned 
sharply with his teachings of an immanent World-Soul and 
the enslavement of the human will even in matters moral. 
Consequently he did not protest when the Rabbinical College 


SELECTED WRITINGS 147 


of Amsterdam excommunicated him because of non- 
observance of the Jewish law, and he did not claim in the 
face of his Tractatus Theologico-Politicus and his Ethics to be 
a Jew. 

Similarly, the numerous Jewish pantheists and material- 
ists of our own time are Jews only in a restricted sense. 
They who assert that God does not exist in reality, that He 
is merely the creation of man’s imagination and not Himself 
the Creator, stand in direct opposition to the central principle 
of Judaism. Judaism does not forbid honest struggle and 
inquiry in the realm of thought—on the contrary, it demands 
it, even at the risk of independent thought leading to utterly 
un-Jewish conclusions. For this reason scientific material- 
ism has the right to exist among Jews and to have its say. 
We refuse to justify only that sensual materialism which 
expresses itself in the formula: Let us eat and drink, for 
tomorrow we die! 

It is true, Modern Judaism sets aside certain beliefs 
formerly held sacred and emphasizes certain others con- 
sidered formerly of lesser importance. But our Orthodox 
adversaries (or the more learned among them) would not 
very strenuously object to that—‘‘if the kopherim [sceptics] 
would only abide by the written Law,” they say. Indeed 
they would willingly leave it to Heaven to settle scores with 
those who insist that the Torah does not teach the resurrec- 
tion of the dead. 

The problem now arises, How did Modern Judaism come 
into being? To answer this question we must extend our 
view from the place and time in which we live to more distant 
regions and back to the last century. There we may be 
able to pick up certain strands originally woven into the 
mediaeval fabric but which extend beyond the Middle Ages 
and afford the connection with Modern Judaism. Let us 


148 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


turn our eyes first to Moses Mendelssohn, the man in whom 
the history of Modern Judaism has its beginning. Mendels- 
sohn himself did not break with the Law—on the contrary, 
he was law-abiding, even scrupulous in the observance of 
the religious rites of daily life, and never omitted, morning 
or evening, one may be certain, the recital of the prescribed 
prayers. But he ventured to talk pure German to Lessing 
and to Gleim and to Nicolai and others; to speak a language 
which only the other day was pronounced heretical by a 
Hungarian fanatic, to abandon the Judaeo-German jargon 
which this same contemporary of ours has called holy, and 
which, if I am not mistaken, he says is the language in which 
the Torah was written; to publish German works in German 
characters. It was a significant step forward. In the year 
1754 appeared the first book ever written and published by 
a Jew in the German language, Mendelssohn’s Philosophische 
Gesprache. ‘This event and this year may well be considered 
the turning-point in the history of Judaism—if history per- 
mits of such exactness. 

For the exact fixing of dates of this character is always 
a delicate matter. Movements develop slowly and gradually 
and many a deed may be done today, the full historic signifi- 
cance of which will only be appreciated by a later historian 
and which indeed cannot now be thus appreciated, since no 
one is in a position to know to what mighty chain of events 
the present happening may form the first causal link. This 
was the case with Mendelssohn’s first German writings. 

After his unpleasant controversy with Lavater, Mendels- 
sohn’s activity became more definitely Jewish in character: 
he translated a large part of the Bible into pure German and 
wrote commentaries which in their simplicity and directness 
presented a striking contrast to the strained and artificial 
commentaries of the Talmudic schools. By his example 


SELECTED WRITINGS 149 


even more than by his direct teaching, Mendelssohn influ- 
enced the Jews hitherto confined within their spiritual 
ghettoes to accept general world-culture and German thought 
and custom. 

After Mendelssohn, Jews began at once to ascend the 
heights of modern culture and science. During the first 
half of the eighteenth century only a few, here and there, 
had learned, in secret, their German alphabet. But the 
century had not yet run its course before German Jews had 
arrived at positions of eminence in society, in art, and in the 
sciences. Salomon Maimon, Lazarus Bendavid, Dr. Markus 
Herz, David Friedlander, Rahel Levin (afterward Frau 
Varnhagen von Ense), and many others who might be 
named in this connection were children of the eighteenth 
century. . 

The acceptance by Jews of modern secular culture made 
it inevitable that theoretical and practical revision in the 
realm of religion should also take place. An improved 
aesthetic sense soon demanded that the synagogue discard 
its uncouth mediaeval ways and make a more pleasing ex- 
ternal appeal. Participation in civic and political life, lim- 
ited though it was, gave rise to conflicts between the demands 
of Jewish Law and those of modern life which persistently 
clamored for settlement. Participation in the scientific 
work of the time showed the worthlessness of many con- 
ceptions which in the ghetto had been naively considered 
as sacred truth. 

In the beginning, attempts at practical Reform were 
naturally timid and uncertain, and in part they failed com- 
pletely. Sometimes they even originated from discreditable 
motives, such as vanity striving for the approval of Christian 
neighbors, or unmanly eagerness to make a bid for condi- 
tional civil emancipation. Gradually, however, these at- 


150 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


tempts at Reform became bolder, more enlightened, more 
sincere, and in the end they were successful, until now many 
reforms widely discountenanced only two or three decades 
ago are generally accepted, and others which two or three dec- 
ades ago were considered sacred are today in general disuse. 
Orthodoxy has surrendered a great many of its outer forti- 
fications and is now defending only its innermost stronghold. 
Choral singing, denounced only a few years ago as an un- 
Jewish custom, has been introduced even in Orthodox 
synagogues, and sermons, vehemently opposed, at least in — 
their modern form, in many quarters, are now delivered 
by the most determined protagonists of modern Orthodoxy, 
as, for example, Hirsch in Frankfort, Lehman in Mainz, Klein 
in Kolmar, Adler in London, and Leeser in Philadelphia. 
And even far more important things might be mentioned— 
important, that is to say, from the viewpoint of Ortho- 
doxy—which have been given up as beyond recovery. 


It is time to proceed, or rather to turn back, to a survey 
of the Talmudic-Rabbinical epoch. Since we have already 
characterized this epoch as one of rigid legalism, our survey 
may be brief. Where and when did Talmudic Judaism 
originate? Where? ‘That is easily answered: in Palestine 
and Babylon. When? Itis not possible to assign any exact 
date to its beginning. Such a revolution—or evolution—is 
not the work of three days (as in the case of some modern 
political revolutions), nor of three years. It took a thousand 
years to bring Talmudism into being. It began five hundred 
years before the birth of Christ, about the time of the return 
from the Babylonian exile, and came to an end five hundred 
years after Christ, with the conclusion of the Babylonian 
Talmud. Its ultimate source is still hidden in profound 
darkness. In view of the dearth of material by which accu- 


SELECTED WRITINGS I51 


rate knowledge and understanding of these remote times 
might be obtained, we are compelled, from such scanty 
sources as do exist, and with the aid of race psychology as 
also individual psychology, to construct the period for 
ourselves, both as to outward fact and inward spirit. 

Much has been accomplished in this way by the ingenious 
deductions of eminent scholars. Nevertheless, in our search 
for the ultimate beginnings of Talmudic Judaism we still 
encounter much that is mysterious and unexplained, and 
that has thus far eluded all attempts at a satisfactory 
explanation. We know that during the time of the First 
Temple the inhabitants of the two kingdoms, Israel and 
Judah, lived at times in a state of downright anarchy, 
productive of violence and immorality, and that crude 
indecency was common, not only in the streets of Jerusalem 
and Samaria, but throughout the provinces as well. We 
know, furthermore, that the people lapsed frequently into 
the idolatry of their neighbors. The idea of monotheism 
which inspired the patriarchs and was subsequently pro- 
claimed with divine eloquence by Moses and Elijah, by 
the psalmists and the prophets, had as yet by no means 
taken root in the mind of the masses, and while in . 
the Temple on Mt. Moriah sacrifices were brought to 
the God of Moses and the prophets, there stood upon the 
heights throughout the country the altars of the Canaanite 
gods, upon which Israelites worshiped Baal and Moloch, 
Ashtoreth and Chemosh, Chiun and Tammuz-—a state of af- 
fairs that persisted until the overthrow of the kingdom. The 
legend is preserved, in the Book of Daniel, of the terrible 
warning that flashed before the eyes of the Babylonian king, 
Belshazzar, as he feasted with his lords: Mene mene thekel 
upharsin—‘ Weighed in the balance and found wanting.”’ 
Some decades earlier, in the time of King Zedekiah, the 


152 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


same decree had been pronounced over Judea, Mene mene 
thekel ubharsin—foredoomed is the fate of the country. The 
enemy came from the north, Judea succumbed, and the Jews 
went into Babylonian captivity. Seventy years later they re- 
turned—a changed people! Nota trace of idolatry remained! 
The inclination toward Canaanite worship and heathenish 
Canaanite ideas had disappeared as by magic. An entirely 
new world of religious conceptions now confronts us. The 
nation shows henceforward unshakable firmness in its faith 
in the God of the prophets, sacred zeal and glowing enthu- 
siasm for this faith, intense and deeply rooted love of it, and 
extraordinary attention to the observance and development 
of the Mosaic Law. The second Isaiah and the later 
prophets—Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, etc.—address an 
audience totally different from that of the first Isaiah or 
Hosea or even Jeremiah. And in addition to the astonishing 
phenomena of monotheism suddenly become steadfast and 
the Mosaic Law suddenly clung to with eager devotion, we 
perceive that entirely new ideas have taken root and devel- 
oped among the returned exiles, as, for instance, the belief 
in angels and demons, in resurrection of the body, in previous 
existence of the soul. We account for these new elements 
in the Judaism of that time by the fact of the intimate 
contact of the Jews during the exile with Parseeism and 
Zoroastrianism, and with the philosophical and religious 
conceptions of Central Asia. As a consequence of this 
contact, a multitude of foreign ideas, many of them dis- 
tinctly anti-Jewish, penetrated Judaism to such an extent 
that the prophets and even the Talmudists of the early 
Christian Era had to inveigh against Parsee dualism, against 
Ormuzd and Ahriman. All this, however, does not satis- 
factorily explain that vast spiritual change which took place 
during the exile. Such tremendous spiritual revolutions, 


SELECTED WRITINGS 153 


tremendous both in depth and in extent of influence, do not 
ordinarily occur within the space of half a century. They 
cannot possibly do so. How then did the change take place 
in the times of Zerubbabel and the high priest Joshua, of 
Ezra and Nehemiah? How did Talmudism arise out of 
Mosaism, and Judaism out of Israelitism? How? Let us 
open the books of the historians. The early writers had, 
of course, no idea of pragmatic historiography, and only 
recounted external events; they do not introduce us into the 
secret workshops of spiritual life in which the roots of history 
really lie. Moreover, they give us only very scanty accounts 
of the period, which accounts may be supplemented by the 
discovery of hitherto unknown sources, or of literary treas- 
ures which the world had thought forever lost, by the read- 
ing and interpretation of inscriptions and old coins and the 
like. We can become acquainted with the inner life of the 
period only through inference; we ourselves must determine 
the causal relation between thought and thought, between 
thought and deed, and between deed and deed. 

Up to the present time, unfortunately, Judaism has not 
had many historians with the proper conception of the writ- 
ing of history, and their answers to our present problem are 
quite inadequate. The names of Jost and Herzfeld and 
Graetz may all be mentioned in this connection, for not one 
of these men explains the origin of Talmudic Judaism. 
If we turn to non-Jewish authorities, such as Professor 
Ewald of Goéttingen or the Catholic teacher and dignitary 
Déollinger of Munich, we find many isolated facts skilfully 
brought to light and many glittering hypotheses; but the 
main question—how it came about that Judaism emerged 
from exile entirely transformed—they leave unexplained. 
Indeed they cannot do otherwise, since the chief sources, 
the historical traditions set down in the voluminous literature 


154 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


of the Talmud, are for the most part closed to them. For 
since Buxtorf the study of the Talmud has been much 
neglected in the non-Jewish world, and one writer after 
another has simply copied the errors of his predecessors. 
If not errors in the laws themselves, at any rate false inter- 
pretations are repeated again and again, like inherited 
illnesses passed on from one generation to another. Thus 
Strauss 1s most misleading where, in his account of the period 
preceding the rise of Christianity, he attempts to describe 
the spiritual life of the Jews. ‘Though Strauss in his criticism 
of the gospels may appear far more learned and scholarly 
than does Renan in the inspired work of fiction which he 
has called La vie de Jésus, the truth is just the reverse: 
the Frenchman surpasses the German in understanding of 
Judaism in the time of Jesus—and this simply because of 
his superior knowledge of Hebrew and other Semitic 
languages. 

It is Geiger who has shed most light upon the obscurity 
of Jewish history in the time of the Second Temple, par- 
ticularly through his important book, Urschrift und Ueber- 
setzungen der Bibel. Geiger is not only a most learned critic, 
he is also an investigator of genius; and following the two- 
thousand-year-old trail of Jewish spiritual life, he has often 
come, by intuition, upon the true facts. He has shown us 
the evidence of the existence of an old Halachah which not 
only ceased to be of practical effect ages ago, but which has 
even completely disappeared save for scattered allusions in 
ancient and little-known writings. It was he who first 
interpreted correctly the intense factional strife during the 
period of the Second Temple, and who proved, beyond dis- 
pute, that the division between Pharisees and Sadducees had 
not only a religious but likewise a political significance. Yet, 
notwithstanding Geiger, many laurels remain to be won in 


SELECTED WRITINGS 155 


this field of historical research, and a future investigator may 
perhaps say, as did Rabbi Judah ha-Nasi when he declared 
the harvest of Beth-shean exempt from the payment of 
tithes: “‘My predecessors have left me opportunity to 
distinguish myself also.” Let us hope then that future 
research will accomplish the task left to it of shedding 
light upon the still obscure beginnings of the Talmudic epoch! 

So obscure are these beginnings that even the figure of 
Simon the Just, one of the last of the Men of the Great 
Synod, is hidden by a dense mist of legend. From the 
Maccabean period on, however, the sources are more numer- 
ous and our knowledge is clearer. Contemporary writings 
are available, both Jewish and non-Jewish, Palestinian and 
Alexandrian. We perceive that the seed sown in the time 
of Ezra has borne fruit; that synagogues have arisen beside 
the Temple; that the characteristic exegesis of the Talmud 
which reads more into the Scriptures than out of them is 
already in full flower; that in the natural course of history 
many forms and institutions different from those of the 
Bible have come into being; that the Bible is considered the 
norm for everything, and its words are interpreted to suit 
the conditions of the time at whatever sacrifice of natural 
meaning. ‘“‘Study Holy Writ,” admonished an ancient sage, 
“let it illumine every side of life, for everything is contained 
in it.”” The controversies between the parties, the scholastic 
wrangles of the sages, the disputations of the masters and 
the pupils, of the House of Shammai and the House of 
Hillel, of Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Ishmael, etc.—all centered 
about the effort to prove, by this or that Biblical passage, 
that individual views had the sanction of divine authority. 

The Halachah of the Sadducees did not gain recognition, 
nor did certain aspects of the Pharisaic Halachah. Thus, 
for instance, Rabbi Akiba won the victory over Rabbi 


156 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Ishmael, as did others over their antagonists. There is 
abundant documentary evidence of all this in the Mishnah, 
Tosephta, Mechilta, Siphra, Siphre, the two Talmuds and 
the old Midrashim. In the fifth century, Talmudic liter- 
ature, properly so called, came to an end with the final 
redaction of the Babylonian Talmud. 

Then came cruel times. Persecution began with inde- 
scribable violence to rage anew against the helpless Jews. 
Under its onslaught the active spiritual life died away, the 
academies fell into decay, and stagnation ensued. Follow- 
ing the enthronement of Christianity in Byzantium, came 
a dark period both for Judaism and the Jews. The geonim, 
first in Bagdad, then in North Africa and Spain, and later in 
France and Germany, continued to build upon the Talmudic 
foundation. ‘There was no desire to dispute anything laid 
down in the Talmud, nor was there, as people believed, any 
justification for doing so. Mediaeval rabbinism, therefore, 
does not represent a new epoch, it is merely a continuation 
of Talmudism—the period in which the Talmud was epito- | 
mized, systematized, and codified. For proof of this, we may 
turn to the great halachic writings of Alfasi, of Maimonides, 
of Moses of Coucy, of Asher ben Jechiel, of Jacob ben Asher, 
of Joseph Caro, and others, all thoroughly Talmudic in spirit. 


Let us now survey the remotest of the three epochs and 
examine the origin of Mosaic Judaism. Properly the word 
Judaism should not be used in this connection. ‘‘Israelit- 
ism’’ or “‘ Mosaism”’ would be more correct. But exception 
may also be taken to the word Mosaism, which is ordinarily 
used to designate the totality of institutions, cultural as 
well as legal and political, supposed to have been the crea- 
tion of Moses, whereas Judaism lays claim to pre-Mosaic 
origin. Abraham is the true father of Judaism. Will he, 


SELECTED WRITINGS 157 


too, evaporate in a myth? The sceptically inclined will 
have no trouble in blotting him out from the pages of history. 
Professor Ewald has succeeded in doing so, as has also 
Professor Steinthal, who denies historical personality to 
Abraham just as he does to other so-called patriarchs and 
legendary kings. In the opinion of these scholars, these 
names which have come down to us from remote antiquity 
merely designate the heroes of nebulous legends. Without 
going into extended discussion of the matter we would 
merely say that it appears to us wiser to leave Abraham in 
his place. Many things are more satisfactorily explained by 
the hypothesis of an Abraham than by any other theory. 
Not that the name of the first monotheist matters greatly. 
At some time monotheism had its beginning in the world. 
Upon the mind of some human being the grand idea of 
monotheism first dawned. And this first monotheist was a 
patriarch of the Jews—Abraham, let us call him! 

We stand here before a great problem of world-history— 
the origin of monotheism, Judaism’s central and eternal 
principle, its unchanging and essential element. 

All mankind was steeped in the darkness of idolatry, all 
the world covered by the night of heathenism—when, to a 
shepherd pasturing his flock on the banks of the Jordan was 
revealed the God-idea which has been cherished in Israel to 
this day. All mankind was steeped in the darkness of 
idolatry, all the world covered by the night of heathenism— 
when, to a tiny people in Palestine, far inferior in other 
aspects of culture, in the arts and sciences, to their contem- 
poraries of Greece and Egypt, there was proclaimed the 
purest and most sublime monotheism. All mankind was 
steeped in the darkness of idolatry, all the world covered 
by the night of heathenism—when there arose in Israel a 
monotheism of such perfection and purity that today, after 


158 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


three thousand years, we have not gone beyond it. For the 
religious ideas we possess today are not purer nor more 
elevated than those of the prophets and psalmists upon which 
they are based. The school children of the present may be 
better versed in arithmetic and geography and physics than 
were Moses and Isaiah, David and Asaph; but as regards a 
vision of God, our greatest philosophers are on a level with 
the dust as compared with them. Many a century will pass 
before mankind—before even a small part of mankind—will 
attain to that noble conception of God which inspired the 
prophets of Israel. 

But how did it happen that this great thought came first 
to a Hebrew, to a member of the simple and unlearned He- 
brew folk ? ‘‘But monotheism did not originate among the 
Hebrews alone,” I am answered, ‘‘the entire Semitic group 
was monotheistic. Monotheism was an instinct of the 
Semitic race.” 

With what zeal scholars have attempted to disprove the 
fact that monotheism was brought into the world by Juda- 
ism! ‘Thus, for instance, Nork and others insisted upon a 
connection between Judaism and ancient Brahmanism, a 
contention so absurd as to be scarcely worth refuting. 
Roth and others denied Judaism any claim to originality 
and described it as made up partly of Egyptian mysteries 
and partly of Bactro-Persian ideas. It was maintained 
already eighteen hundred years ago, by the Alexandrian 
anti-Semite Apion, against whom, as is well known, Josephus 
wrote a polemical tract, that Judaism had borrowed from 
Egyptian theology. The same assertion was repeated by 
Schiller, whose essay Die Sendung Moses attempts with the 
aid of brilliant rhetoric to make the Alexandrian nonsense 
plausible. It is conceded that the forms of some of the 
Mosaic ceremonies have been taken from the Egyptians— 





SELECTED WRITINGS 159 


their forms only, not their spiritual content. But the Jewish 
conception of a one and only God differs in its essence so 
completely from the Egyptian conception of a fourfold god- 
head with its numerous categories of inferior gods, and the 
realistically conceived God of the Jews differs so completely 
from Egyptian deifications of metaphysical concepts of time 
and space, spirit and matter, that we can only conclude that 
somehow the learned Roth, usually so circumspect, has 
allowed himself to be led into serious error. In the same 
way the statement may be refuted that one source of Juda- 
ism lies in Bactro-Persian religious ideas, at least in so far 
as we are concerned with the main element of Judaism, 
monotheism. Certainly it is a simple matter to perceive 
the sharp distinction between the strict monotheism of Juda- 
ism and the frank dualism of the Parsees. 

However, these theories are now more or less discredited. 
Instead, one hears much about Semitic monotheism, the 
alleged monotheistic instinct, that is, of the Semitic race. 
Renan, in particular, has argued for this theory in a spirited 
and scholarly way. On close inspection it proves to be 
nothing more than an iridescent soap-bubble. ‘To be sure, 
the monotheistic religions of the world, Judaism, Chris- 
tianity, and Mohammedanism, are all of Semitic origin. 
But Christianity is indisputably the offspring of Judaism— 
Jesus and the apostles were true members of the Jewish 
community—and as for Mohammed, it has long ago been 
proved that his monotheism was directly transplanted from 
Judaism. The Arabs of his time were star worshipers. 
Neither Jesus in Galilee nor Mohammed in Mecca arrived 
at monotheism independently of Judaism. Consider now the 
non-Hebraic Semites, the Babylonians and Assyrians, the 
Phoenicians and Carthaginians, the Canaanites and Arabs. 
These worshipers of Baal, of Ashtoreth, of Dagon and 


160 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Moloch, of Milcom and Elyon, of the sun and the stars— 
were they monotheists ? 

The names of Semitic gods frequently embody the idea 
of “Lord” or “King” or ‘‘ Highest,”’ but this fact does not 
preclude polytheism—as little as the names Dyaus, the 
Shining One, or Brahma, the Mighty One, or Jupiter Optimus 
Maximus, the Best and Greatest, prove that polytheism was 
unknown to the Hindus and Romans. The appellation Lord, 
or King, proves only that the Semites conceived of one of 
their deities as the highest but not the only god. Thus the 
Midianite priest Jethro exclaims, ‘‘Now I perceive that 
Jehovah is greater than all other gods.’”’ Even some of the 
psalmists, exalting Jehovah high above all other gods, are 
not free from this conception. 

Renan, discussing ‘“‘Semitic monotheism,” first in his 
Histoire générale des langues Sémitiques, published in 1857, 
later in several monographs, and with particular emphasis 
in the famous address he delivered on entering upon his pro- 
fessorship in Hebrew at the Collége de France, posited a 
religious as well as a lingual relationship between the Semitic 
peoples, and declared monotheism to be an instinct of the 
Semitic race. Likewise he attributed an instinct for phi- 
losophy, natural science, and politics to the Aryan races. 
His thesis is false on either side. Romans, Teutons, Slavs, 
Persians, Hindus, have no natural bent for philosophy. 
Philosophy arose among a single Aryan people, the Greeks, 
and from Greece it spread to other nations. Similarly it 
was a single Semitic tribe, the Israelites, which gave birth 
to monotheism, and from Israel it made its way to the rest 
of the world. To Abraham and his descendants the world 
owes the blessing of monotheism. 

In the heat of controversy evoked by this theory of a 
‘‘Semitic instinct,’”’? Renan descended from the level of an 


SELECTED WRITINGS 161 


impartial scholar and historian to that of a special pleader. 
With great diligence he followed every trace of monotheism 
among Semitic peoples but carefully avoided every evidence 
of polytheism. The baselessness of his contention has been 
convincingly shown by several great scholars, notably by 
Professor Max Miiller of Oxford and by Renan’s own suc- 
cessor, the celebrated Solomon Munk, whose knowledge of 
Semitic peoples and languages was even more thorough and 
minute than that of Renan, whose excellent scholarship 
and brillant intellect, however, we would by no means wish 
to deny. 

Moreover, the word instinct explains nothing. What is 
instinct ? In Renan’s use of the term, it does not have its 
ordinary psychological meaning, but is a vague phrase 
devoid of any rational content other than mere super- 
natural revelation. Had the Semites originally been pos- 
sessed of such an instinct, how could they lose it so 
completely ? Can an instinct be destroyed ? 

Even the assumption that the Hebraic tribes possessed 
such a race instinct is utterly untenable. Again and again 
we see the people of Israel relapsing into polytheism. From 
the mouths of many inspired psalmists and prophets we hear 
the praise of Jehovah as a God lifted above all other gods—a 
proof that in scriptural times monotheism had by no means 
yet attained perfect purity nor permeated all Israel. It 
needed a zealot like Elijah to bring the people on Mt. 
Carmel to confess: Jehovah, He is Elohim! Joshua instructs 
the people that their ancestors, even Terah, the father of 
Abraham, had served strange gods and calls upon them to 
make their choice. Laban, Abraham’s very kinsman and 
contemporary, calls the idols stolen from him by his daughter 
Rachel, his gods. In the face of all this, what becomes of 
the Israelite’s instinct for monotheism ? 


162 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


According to all the evidence of history, monotheism 
had its inception in the person of Abraham. From him it 
descended to Isaac, who in turn bequeathed it to Jacob, from 
whom it came as an inheritance to his descendants, the 
Children of Israel. The glorious chain of the prophets kept 
it alive, preserved it from destruction, protected it from 
irrelevant additions, gave it more profound meaning, and 
instilled it into the people. 

But how did Abraham arrive at his monotheistic belief ? 
A question difficult indeed to answer. ‘The ordinary laws of 
psychology offer us no explanation. It is necessary to have 
recourse to a word unacceptable to many of you—the word 
revelation. Let me say at once that I do not mean by revela- 
tion the proclamation to men of truths from without. Rev- 
elations are psychological processes—processes, however, 
which are beyond the reach of our observation and which do 
not come under the ordinary laws of psychology. 

The divine voice that spoke in Abraham and to Abraham, 
in the prophets and to the prophets, is the same divine voice 
which speaks to every human being—but the organs of 
perception in most of us are either wanting or defective. 
These organs of perception do not lie in the intellect or 
the imagination or in strange instinctive feelings, but in a 
power and elevation of the spirit which are scarcely conceiv- 
able to us in their high ethical purity. Not syllogisms nor 
visions nor mystical ecstasy made the prophets, but God’s 
own election. He revealed Himself to them by giving them 
organs capable of receiving his revelations. Divine revela- 
tions are neither unnatural nor supernatural, but, being 
divine, they are past our comprehension. 

In the field of science we also speak sometimes of revela- 
tion. ‘Thus the incident of the falling apple suddenly making 
clear to Newton the mystery of gravitation is figuratively 


SELECTED WRITINGS 163 


referred to as enlightenment from above—as revelation. 
But Newton’s mind concerned itself constantly with the 
subjects of mathematics and physics, and even if he could 
not show forth the logical chain of thought which led to the 
new knowledge, because of the lightning-like rapidity with 
which judgments and conclusions passed through his brain 
at the moment of the falling of the apple, we still need not 
have recourse to the supernatural in accounting for it. 
Archimedes furnishes us with a similar example in the 
sudden revelation which came to him in his bath concerning 
the loss of weight which bodies undergo in water. In either 
instance the revelation which came to these heroes of 
science was but the last link in a logical series too rapid for 
consciousness to follow. 

But in the case of Abraham there was no such chain of 
reasoning to which the concept of one spiritual and holy 
God could be added as a final link. That shepherd-emir, 
tending his flocks on the banks of the Jordan in southern 
Palestine, made no religio-philosophical investigations; he 
knew nothing of teleological or theophysical proofs for the 
existence of God. A ray of light miraculously illumined his 
soul. How? We cannot tell. If you choose to call the 
event miraculous, mysterious—well, it 7s a mystery, and 
before it, as before many another mystery, we can only 
stand in wonder. 

It would be proper at this point to sketch for you, at 
least in broad outlines, the development of Judaism in its 
first epoch. But I am afraid I have already exceeded my 
allotment of time, and I must therefore reserve the continua- 
tion of our theme for another occasion. 


RABBI PATRICK * 
1889 


READERS of the Menorah, permit me to make you 
acquainted with a rabbi who lived about sixteen hundred 
years ago and whose name is mentioned several times in 
the Talmud and in the Midrash. This rabbi whom I am 
going to introduce to you was, it is true, not a very promi- 
nent man, and he did not occupy a particularly brilliant 
position among those of his contemporaries who were 
engaged in the fields of the Halachah or of the Haggadah. 
He belonged rather to the common rank and file. Neverthe- 
less, I claim a little attention for him, if only on account of 
his name. Ladies and gentlemen, I introduce to you Rabbi 
Patrick, the son of Rabbi Dositheus and the brother of 
Rabbi Drusus. 

Rabbi Patrick? Rabbi Patrick? Many of my readers, 
I imagine, will be incredulous. For very likely they may be 
of the opinion that Patrick is a name exclusively in use 
among the Irish, and that there was never a Jew living 
whose name was Patrick. 

‘No, it is not possible,” says Mr. Hubert Falkenstein, 
“that a Rabbi Patrick was ever existing. I hail from the 
city of Berlin, where more than sixty thousand Jews are 
living, and I am certain that not one Patrick is among them. 
I travelled extensively in the different parts of the European 
continent, and I never met any Jewish Patrick. J have read 
the eleven volumes of Graetz’s History, and I am sure that 
nowhere therein the name Patrick occurs. I am inclined to 
believe that some joke is meant by this ‘Rabbi Patrick.’” 


9 


* Reprinted from Menorah Monthly, 6: 19-29. 
164 


SELECTED WRITINGS 165 


“TI agree with you, Mr. F alkenstein,” says Mr. Berush 
Warshawski. ‘You know I am a Lithuak by birth, and in 
my younger days I attended the yeshibah in Wolosin, and 
there I read the entire Talmud over and over again. But 
that I ever found the name Rabbi Patrick in it, this is more 
than I can say. Or has my memory ceased to serve me?” 

Mr. Zalman Teitelbaum, a native of Galicia, is also 
a sceptic. He says that he was forty years old before 
he came to America, and for the first time did he learn in 
America that there were people in the world whose names 
were Patrick. A Jew in Talmudical times could not possi- 
bly have been called by such an Irish name. 

And thus we are met on all sides by unbelief and blank 
denial, or at least by doubting and scepticism. 

What is to be done now? We must bring forward our 
authorities, and we must demonstrate that there was a 
Rabbi Patrick and that his name zs mentioned in the Tal- 
mudical literature. And to this we now proceed. 


But bear with me, dear readers, if now, in producing my 
evidence, I write as a real Dr. Dryasdust. I know that I am 
speaking to the readers of the Menorah, and the Meno- 
rah is a monthly which does not circulate merely among 
Hebrew scholars. Its circle of readers is larger, and the 
majority of them would not be satisfied if too often articles of 
dry learning were offered to them in the manner and 
method of erudite researches. But every rule has its excep- 
tion. And so I indulge now in some dry notes in which I 
shall attempt to prove the truth of the assertion made 
above. 

In Midrash ’Hazitha ad Song of Solomon, III, 10, also 
in Bamidbar Rabba, Sec. XII, and in Yerush. Yoma, IV, 
4, there is to be found a definition of zahabh muphaz, the 


166 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


name of a certain kind of gold, by Rabbi Patrick (*pPrnus 
"p mp), a brother of Rabbi Drusus. 

In Bab. Zebhwhim, 12 a, and in ’Hullin, 81 a, Rabbi 
Patrick (*P™NUEN “Pp "TIWEN) discusses the question whether a 
calf or a lamb or a kid is fit to be offered as a sacrifice in the 
night between the seventh and the eighth day of its life. 

In Mena’ hoth, 55 b, we find R. Patrick ((p"s1u5s) laying 
down a hermeneutical canon concerning the application of a 
certain logical rule. 

In ’Hullin, 64 b, Dositheus, the father of R. Patrick 
("D""1WEN) expresses his opinion on the question whether 
or not an egg in a certain condition is permitted to be eaten. 

In Babha Metzia, 5 a, the question is considered whether 
in a civil suit before a court a partial confession is conclusive, 
or whether more evidence is to be desired in order to estab- 
lish the truth. And among those who participated in this 
discussion was the father of R. Patrick (*P"™WEX). 

‘‘Hold on,” Mr. Teitelbaum here interrupts, “hold on. 
Your quotations, I admit, are reliable and are given accu- 
rately. But are we sure that the proper name appearing in 
these passages and brought forward by you is really a tran- 
scription in Hebrew letters of the name Patrick, or of the 
older name Patricius from which Patrick is derived? In 
most of the passages quoted the name appears as "P™UEN, 
and therefore I consider it as possible and likely that my 
Rebbe may have been correct after all when he taught me to 
read ‘Rabbi Aphtoriki.’” 

To which we answer: In the passage from Mzdrash 
’Hazitha, cited above, there is a better reading of the name, 
viz., “p™1uD (Patriki). If now in the Babylonian Tal- 
mud we have the name appearing in the form "Pp™1Q5N, or 
"p"IOEN , we must consider the aleph in the beginning as a 
so-called aleph prostheticum, which is so very common in 


SELECTED WRITINGS 167 


neo-Hebraic and Aramaic word formations, and especially in 
the transliteration of loan-words borrowed from other lan- 
guages; compare, for instance, NWi372N8 (magian), NOAINCTN 
(stomach), N™>p=ECN (glass, looking-glass), 710558 (Platon), 
etc.; and the vav in the middle, we must either take as a 
sign of a dialectical modification of the name or as an 
accidental misspelling. 

We must be prepared to meet still another objection. 
Mr. Warshawski rises to remark that the older form of 
the name was Patricius, not Patrick. How, then, he says, 
can the Hebrew letter koph be justified in the trans- 
literation ? 

Very easily, thus: The ancients pronounced the letter 
c in all cases—before @, e and 7, too—as k, and so it is but 
natural that this c in Latin words is always rendered by a 
Hebrew p. Thus we find for Cesar, "O"p; for oceanus, 
CiS"PIN; for circus, NCP p; for Ursicinus (the name of a 
Roman general of the fourth century mentioned several 
times in Talmud and Midrash), O2°"p"O"s8; and so forth. The 
letter koph will still more readily be admitted as correct 
when we consider that most of this class of words are directly 
borrowed from the Greek, and that the Hebrew koph stands 
for the Greek kappa. 

In addition to what has been said thus far, we can fur- 
thermore state that the name Patrick (p70) clearly 
appears as a Jewish name in a document of the first half of 
the tenth century without any prefixed or suffixed letter 
whatsoever. In a collection of Teshubhoth Geonim (Legal 
Responses of the Geonim), ed. A. Harkavy, Berlin, 1887, we 
are told (Resp. No. 535, p. 263) that once a case was sub- 
mitted to R. Saadyah Gaon regarding a donation made under 
compulsion by a certain Patrick, in conjunction with a 
woman by the name of ’Hayona, and Saadyah decided that a 


168 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


conveyance of property under such circumstances was null 
and void. Here we have then another Patrick. 

But, it may be asked, can it be possible that Jews living 
in Asia, amidst Mohammedans and Parsees, should have 
had such a European name? 

The bearing of such names by Eastern Jews will not 
appear so very strange when we consider that even in those 
distant days of the past there was constant intercommuni- 
cation between Jews in Persia and Jews in the Byzantine 
Empire. In evidence of this fact we refer to No. 225 (p.105) 
of the Teshubhoth named above, where we read that a gaon 
who was interpreting a certain Talmudical word of Greek 
origin, said: ‘‘We have asked our Greek pupils hailing from 
Constantinople, and they said that in Greek .. . ” and so 
forth. 

In this place we must not omit to state that Schorr, in 
his ’Haluz, Vol. X, pp. 12 and 22, considers the names 
"pyIOEN and “"pinuy, together with many other names, as 
being not exactly proper names, but as being a kind of cog- 
nomination whereby certain sayings of the men bearing these 
names were alluded to. In order to find the meaning of 
these, according to him, appellative names, Schorr goes back 
to Greek roots. 

But in the present case we cannot agree with him. 
Schorr is undoubtedly one of the greatest Talmudical scholars 
of our age. His two articles on names in our ancient litera- | 
ture are the production of a master mind. With genuine 
ingenuity he found the key to the proper understanding of 
many enigmatical names in Talmud and Midrash. But in 
going into details he misapplied, in some cases, the evidently 
correct rule which he discovered, and he considered some 
nouns which, beyond any doubt, were nothing else but com- 
mon proper names given to children by their parents, as 


SELECTED WRITINGS 169 


having been of such an appellative character, and as having 
been bestowed upon the men in their later life or after their 
death. In consequence of his doing so some of his explana- 
tions are undoubtedly far-fetched or even baseless. 

Let us make more clear what we intend to say here by 
an illustration. Suppose two thousand years hence a histori- 
ographer says that in the nineteenth century men were 
living in America who were called ‘“‘Rail-splitter,” ‘‘ Great 
Commoner,” “Horizontal Bill,’ ‘‘Watchdog of the Treas- 
ury,” ‘‘Weather-clerk,” and so forth, but that these names 
were not the real names of these men, and that these men 
were only called so by their cotemporaries in allusion to 
certain deeds done by them, or for certain peculiarities in 
character, or for some other reason. ‘This historiographer, 
we know, would be perfectly correct. But suppose he went 
farther and said also: A general was then living who 
was called Grant, because he granted humane conditions 
of surrender to General Lee and the Southern armies. Would 
this historian be also correct in this statement ? Would he 
not go too far in the application of a favorite theory ? 

I trust I have given sufficient reasons for my disagreeing 
on this point with the eminent scholar in Brody, and for my 
rendering the names "p°"05, etc., by ‘ Patrick.” 


And now, after my long digression—which I expect you 
have skipped—I come back to you, kind ‘‘general reader.” 
You have glanced rapidly over the preceding ‘‘dry”’ notes, 
and you have pronounced them to be nothing else than 
unfruchtbare Notizkrameret. You have put them aside as not 
being worth the attention of any man who values his time. 
Now, dear friend, I do not speak of my “Notizenkram”’; 
you may think of it as little as possible, and I shall not dis- 
turb you in your opinion. But I would like to have my say 


170 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


in regard to such “hunting after details,” as you call it, in 
general. 

Mark, there is a difference between Notizkradmeret and 
Notizkrémeret. One may be an industrious gatherer of liter- 
ary curiosities, a successful collector of historical rarities, 
and yet be nothing but the possessor of a number of 
isolated and detached facts and of some hundreds of discon- 
nected details which are stored in the mind without one’s 
understanding their significance in themselves or their organic 
connection with other facts in history and literature, with 
causes and conditions preceding them and with facts and 
events following them. Such “‘kram”’ is idle, is dead. The 
owner of it may have extensive Kenninisse. But as to 
Erkenntnisse, he may be totally innocent, notwithstanding 
the abundant stores in his memory. 

You are correct in supposing that such Kenntnisse will 
not have much fructifying influence upon mind or upon 
heart or upon volition. You are correct in saying that 
the term “science” would be misapplied if we would desig- 
nate by it such dead stuff. But you are not correct in 
ascribing no value at all to the digging after learned details, 
and to the collecting and sifting and arranging of minor 
points in scholarship. The mastery of such details 1s the con- 
ditio sine qua non without which no true scholarship is possible. 
With such details the true scholar builds up his “‘system,”’ 
and from such details he deduces his conclusions. Without 
them he would build baseless castles in the air; he would 
“construe the world a priori”? by hollow speculations; he 
would dwell in dreamland, and would live upon phrases— 
upon phrases which might be agreeably sounding, but 
which, nevertheless, would be empty, devoid of all sub- 
stance, without power to give to the mind any wholesome 
nourishment. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 171 


Or do you think Mommsen, or Ranke, or Macaulay 
would have become such great historians without any labori- 
ous investigation of details? Old manuscripts, difficult to 
read, they have deciphered; legends upon ancient coins, and 
inscriptions upon broken gravestones, and other epigraphic 
remains from olden times they have restored and read and 
unriddled; to numberless details and to minutiae without an 
end they have devoted ceaseless and untiring studies. And 
thus they performed the work of rigid preparation and laid 
a good and solid foundation before they proceeded to erect 
their firm and enduring superstructures. 

And the same is to be said of such ‘‘kletnliche Notizen- 
krémer” as Zunz, Geiger, Luzzatto, Derenbourg, Stein- 
schneider and other truly learned Jewish scholars. 

As in history and literature, this view holds good in 
natural science and in other provinces of learning. It is 
true, you and I both make use of Darwinistic terms; we 
speak so unhesitatingly and with such fluency and such self- 
satisfaction of the survival of the fittest, of natural selection, 
of the struggle for existence, of the origin of species, etc. 
But do you know what people think of your knowledge and 
of mine in natural science? You and I who have drawn our 
knowledge in this regard from our daily newspaper or from a 
few essays in a popular monthly—we are both ignoramuses, 
they say, and cheeky pretenders, or at best superficial phrase- 
mongers. You, too, dear reader, are included. Yes, you 
particularly. For you understand nothing at all of the 
details. And yet .. . well, let us drop the subject. 

For Darwin it was not such an easy matter. He spent 
a lifetime in careful observations, in painstaking investiga- 
tions, in long and costly experiments. And only in con- 
sequence of them, and only after many years of conscientious 
' studies and investigations, he reached his results. They were 


172 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


grand, yet he remained modest. And after he was satisfied 
and convinced that he had found the truth, or what he con- 
sidered to be the truth, he published his works. And there- 
fore he will be one of the immortals. 


May I add yet some more remarks before I conclude? 
“Rabbi Patrick” has been dug out from the grave of 
oblivion, and a special article concerning him is herewith 
presented. But what of that? Pedantry! they cry out. 
Micrology they callit. ‘Without any value whatsoever’’ is 
the judgment pronounced. It would certainly be pedantry, 
and the whole article would certainly be nothing more 
than an insignificant-anecdotic curiosity, if we could not 
draw from it any larger lesson, and if we were not led by 
it to some important inferences. However, I request you 
to look at it in its connection with the inner and the outer 
life of the Jews and with certain parts of the history of the 
Jews and of Judaism. You may then possibly learn from 
it more than what you can behold upon the surface at 
first sight. You will then discover in it another piece of 
cumulative evidence for a fact which has been proved by 
Zunz already in a learned essay some fifty years ago; you 
will then see here another support for our asserting that since 
the remotest antiquity the Jews did not live in a mental 
ghetto, so to say, and out of contact with the non-Jewish 
world. For here is another instance, little in itself, but signifi- 
cant in its bearings, that Jews in ancient times gave to their 
children Gentile names. Furthermore, we can conclude 
from the Patrick whose name we have found in an old legal 
document written in Persia in the tenth century, that there 
was in those days a migration of Jews from the East to the 
West and from the West to the East. (The older Patrick 
of whom we have spoken above and whose name is found in 


SELECTED WRITINGS 173 


the Talmudic and. Midrashic literature was a Palestinian, 
and from his cotemporaries who are named in connection 
with him we can judge that he probably lived toward the 
end of the third century.) In other regards, too, even such 
common matters as the proper nouns used in certain locali- 
ties and in certain periods of time may instruct us; they may 
reveal to us the true cultural or intellectual or religious or 
political standpoint of whole classes of people. 

You shake your head? You doubt this? Yes, I repeat 
it and I emphasize it, that a good historian and a well-trained 
scholarly mind can learn a great deal from the names com- 
mon among certain nations, even if other sources of informa- 
tion are lacking; he sees in them a reflection of the ideas 
and ideals animating these nations. If we had no Biblical 
literature, if no book of our Bible had come down to us and no 
literary production of ancient Israel had been preserved for 
us except the genealogical lists contained in various chapters 
of the Bible and a record of the numerous other names men- 
tioned in the Bible, could we nevertheless not gain from these 
names alone a deep insight into the mental life of ancient 
Israel? We would reason thus: Here are hundreds of names 
commencing with Yo, or Yeho, or El, others ending with yah, 
or yahu, or shaddat,; surely, this people believed in a Supreme 
Being. Here we find such names as Eliab, Joab, Josaphat, 
Eliezer, Zurishaddai, ’Hananyah, etc.; surely, this people 
must have believed in the fatherhood of God, in his Divine 
Providence, in our moral accountability before a Divine 
Judge, etc. Here we meet such names as Joseph, Zebulon, 
Samuel, Mattithyahu, etc.; surely, children must have been 
looked upon by this people as a blessing from God, etc., etc. 
Should we then, in further examining these lists, find also that 
David had a son whose name was Beelyada (Baalyada), which 
name in another place of our Bible is stated to have been 


174 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Elyada; furthermore, that Jonathan had a son whose name 
was Meribaal, a name which by another Biblical author was 
altered into Mephibosheth (Saul also had a son named 
Mephibosheth), and that Saul had another son whose name 
was Eshbaal, a name which was also amended by another 
Biblical writer and changed into Ishbosheth, then we would 
probably reason thus: There was a time when either the 
conception of God had become much darkened and dete- 
riorated in Israel by the irresistible power of Canaanitish 
and other heathenish influences; or Israel’s theology, which 
in some periods appears to have been so low and so mixed 
with pagan elements, must have been impure in the begin- 
ning and must have risen gradually into purer heights in the 
course of the centuries. For do we not detect in such names 
as Eshbaal and similar ones traces of a belief in the divine 
character of Baal? And in the alteration of these Baal- 
names by certain Biblical writers, in the substitution of 
“bosheth” (ignominy) for ‘Baal,’ in the attempts to en- 
tirely obliterate the memory of Baal, do we not have clear 
indications and evidences that pious men arose who sternly 
opposed having ‘“‘Baal’’ as a component element in a Jewish 
name ? 

Should we after this proceed to compare the proper 
names of the Israelites with those of the Phoenicians, or of 
the Assyrians, or of other Semitic nations, then we would dis- 
cover unmistakable proofs for the fact that in Israel alone 
the monotheistic idea originated and germinated, while the 
other ancient Semitic nations were and remained poly- 
theists. We take, for instance, the Phoenician or Punic 
names Hannibal (572:7), Hasdrubal (Sya-77), Eshmuna- 
zar ("I9272D8), Hamilcar (map>am). In these names also 
do we discover a religious turn of mind, an acknowledgment 
of and a submission to divine beings (mark well, to divine 


SELECTED WRITINGS 175 


beings, in the plural), to Baal, Eshmun, Melkarth. But now 
let us look upon the corresponding Israelitish names ’Han- 
niél (or Yo’hanan), ’Azaryah, El’azar, A’hiyahu—are here 
also traces of prevailing polytheistic ideas ?* 

It is the same with the Babylonian and Assyrian names 
found in Israel’s Bible or brought to light in inscriptions on 
the cuneiform monuments and tablets excavated in Meso- 
potamia during this century. We select a few such names 
from the Bible, leaving other names not found therein to the 
Assyriologists, who are better prepared and more qualified to 
speak on this subject than the present writer is. We point 
for example to San’heribh, Nebukhadnetzar, Belshatzar, 
Adrammelekh, Evilmerodakh, etc., and upon the first glance 
we discover here the names of several gods, in the plural, of 
the Babylonians and Assyrians—the names of Sin, Nebu, 
Bel, Adar, Marduk, etc. What a contrast to Israelitish 
names! 

A student of the science and history of language will 
also draw some instructive conclusions, when he notices 
what linguistic decay took place in these names and what 
morphistic and other changes the names underwent in the 
course of time and in migrating from one nation to another. 
The subject might indeed be much enlarged upon. But 
would we now go on, we might perhaps be tempted to 
seek answers to kindred questions, as for instance: Can we 
gain some insight into the national psychology of the Jewish 
people from their custom of giving to children the names of 
departed parents and other relatives? Can we deduce any 

It may interest even the general reader to note that the German Johann, 
the English John, the French Jean, the Italian Giovanni, etc., are direct descendants 
of the Hebrew name Jo’hanan and cousins of the Punic name ’Hannibal. The 
final syllables kann in Johann and vanni in Giovanni as well as the final letters hn 


in John and an in Jean are etymologically, though somewhat altered in form, the 
reproduction of ’hanni in "Hannibal and of ’hanan in Jo’hanan. 


176 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


lesson from the names selected by American Jewish parents 
of our present day for their children? What is, consciously 
or unconsciously, the reason which guides parents in mak- 
ing their selection of names? Why is it that Jews in 
Poland so obstinately persist in giving to their children such 
names as Lezb, Kreinle, Dovritch, etc., while Jews in Ger- 
many and other Western countries prefer in their stead such 
names as Leopold, Clara, Dorothea, etc.? And so a number 
of other germane questions might be raised. However, in 
trying to answer them we would be led too faraway. More- 
over, this paper has already grown longer than we intended 
it should be, and therefore we will stop here. 


BIBLE INTERPRETATION: HOW AND HOW NOT?! 
1884 


THAT a Jew is now permitted, and indeed invited, to speak 
before Christian ministers of the gospel is a hopeful sign 
that we are approaching the time in which seekers of truth 
of the various denominations can work together, harmoni- 
ously and peacefully, like true brethren. All study and 
investigation must have but one and the same object in 
view, namely, to overthrow ignorance, to emancipate the 
mind from preconceived, but unfounded notions, and to 
arrive at the truth. Any why should Christians and Jews, 
Trinitarians and Unitarians not work thus together? There 
is no Jewish Hebrew grammar, no Christian Hebrew gram- 
mar; no Presbyterian Greek language and no Episcopalian 
Greek language—there is but one and the same Hebrew 
and one and the same Greek forall. I would even go farther. 
I would say that there is no denominational ecclesiastical 
history and no sectarian Bible exegesis. In these fields, 
likewise, the truth is but one. Jn church history, it is of 
course natural that a Jew should be more interested in the 
rabbinical literature of the Middle Ages and the later devel- 
opment of the Jewish church, than a Christian, in most cases, 
would be. On the other hand, it is also to be expected that 
a Christian student will take a deeper interest than a Jew 
in the study of the history of specific Christian doctrines 
and institutions. A Baptist will naturally be more attracted 
by the study of the question of baptism than a Unitarian. 
But the absolute truth, I repeat, is but one. And so I fore- 
see the time when, instead of four or five theological semi- 

t A lecture delivered before the Hebrew Summer School, Morgan Park, IIl. 

177 


178 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


naries in Chicago and its suburbs, there will be but one 
excellently equipped and excellently endowed institution, 
with a large number of teachers for the various branches, 
with libraries and other advantages which may well be 
compared with those in Oxford and Cambridge, in Berlin 
and Leipzig. .This institution for “theological” learning will, 
as I foresee it, be connected with a great coming university, 
and will form an integral part of it. And in this university 
of the future, by the side of professorial chairs for all other 
possible departments of knowledge, and under the silent 
yet powerful influence of the other branches of learning, the 
“theological”? studies will be secured against the creeping 
in of a spirit of mental narrowness on the one hand, and a 
spirit of undue haughtiness on the other. 

But what have I to say concerning the exegesis of the 
Scriptures? Is this not to be taught differently in separate 
denominational seminaries? I answer, without hesitation, 
no. rom the professor’s chair, the Bible must be explained 
and studied without any preconceived doctrinal or sectarian 
bias. History, archaeology, philology, must be the hand- 
maids of Biblical science, and not denominational considera- 
tions. Whether in our day a man may marry his deceased 
wife’s sister, or not, is, as a practical question, to be settled 
by the legislative authorities of the Episcopalian church, in 
England by the English Parliament. But whether such 
marriages were allowed, or prohibited, by the Bible, is for 
the unbiased Old Testament student to say. When and in 
what manner the rite of baptism should be performed, is to 
be decided by the councils and other competent authorities 
of the various Christian sects. But whether the Hebrew 
verb ?ébhdl means ‘‘to immerse,” or “‘to sprinkle,’’ and 
whether immersion or sprinkling was the practice among the 
Jews eighteen hundred years ago, are questions for the 


SELECTED WRITINGS 179 


Hebrew philologist and Bible commentator, for the historian 
of Judaism and Christianity, and not for the elders of churches 
and for delegates to church conventions to determine. These 
questions must be answered and can be answered fully, inde- 
pendently of denominational disputes and rituals. And 
such is even the case in still more important questions of 
dogma and practice. Professors and learners in the field of 
Bible science must rise above all denominational bias. A 
biased teacher will too easily and too frequently darken 
where he should enlighten, and convey errors where he 
should give nothing but the absolute truth. Such biased 
teachers we find among the Jews as well as among the Chris- 
tians, among the Protestants as well as among the Catholics, 
among the Muhammedans as well as among the teachers of 
the two older religions of Semitic origin. 

Let me give here a few instances of such expositions of the 
Bible, tinctured by religious prejudices. Muhammedan 
theologians find in the Old Testament quite a number of 
predictions of, and typical allusions to, the prophet of Mecca, 
where an unprejudiced Jewish or Christian Bible reader 
would not dream of detecting a trace of such an allusion. 
They see, e.g., Muhammed alluded to in Haggai 2:7, in 
these words: “The desire of all the nations shall come.”’ 
The desire (hemdah) of all the nations is Muhammed—so 
the theologians of Islam say—and this is_ sufficiently 
demonstrated by the fact that the words hemdah and 
Muhammed are derived from the same root, from the verb 
hamddh. Is it necessary for us, who do not live under the 
shadow of the mosque, and into whom Muhammedan teach- 
ings have not been engrafted, to show the total fallacy of 
this interpretation? First, the word hémdah, in this passage, 
cannot mean “‘the desired one’’; its meaning is rather ‘‘the 
desirable objects,” ‘“‘the precious things” (plural), as the 


180 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


verb (ubhad’#) is in the plural (‘‘they shall come,” not 
‘‘he shall come’’). Secondly, the whole contextual structure 
shows that the prophet speaks of the coming glory and 
grandeur of the new temple, the erection of which had just 
begun in his time; and, referring to the bright future of the 
rising sanctuary, the inspired prophet says: ‘Thus says the 
Lord of hosts, In a little while I will shake the heavens and 
the earth and the dry land; and I will shake all nations, and 
the precious things of all nations, they shall come |i.e., into 
this house], and I will fill this house with glory,” etc. 

To another instance of Muhammedan Bible-exposition 
I call your attention. You know that Muhammedan theol- 
ogy admits the divine origin of Judaism and of Christian- 
ity; but at the same time it claims that Islam is also 
divinely revealed, and that, moreover, it occupies a higher 
place among religions than do its two older sisters. In sup- 
port of this doctrine, Moses is brought forward and made . 
to bear testimony! Of the words with which his parting 
blessing (Deut. 33:2) commences, Muhammedan theologians 
give the following explanation, ‘‘ The Lord came from Sinai”’; 
that means, the Lord revealed himself to Israel; for Sindy 
signifies the Hebrew people; “‘and He rose in light from Seir 
to them’’; that means, to Christendom also God revealed 
himself; for Sé%r, the country in which Edom dwelt (see 
Gen. 36:8 and other places), stands for Edom, and ‘‘ Edom” 
came, in the course of time, to be regarded as a symbolical 
name for Rome, for the Roman Empire, and afterwards for 
the Christian world, whose spiritual center was in the city 
of Rome; ‘“‘He shone forth from Mount Paran”’; that means, 
God revealed himself also to the Arabian prophet, to Muham- 
med; for Pdérdn, where Ishmael, the patriarch of the Ara- 
bians, was living (Gen. 21:21), is used here to designate the 
Ishmaelite Muhammed. Furthermore, it deserves mention 


SELECTED WRITINGS 181 


that Muhammed himself appealed to the Hebrew Scriptures, 
which, he said, he did not come to destroy, but to fulfil, 
and which, as he argued, for those who had eyes to see, 
pointed to him: ‘A prophet from the midst of you, from 
your brethren, like unto me, will the Lord your God raise 
up unto you; to him you shall hearken.”” Thus we read in 
Deut. 18:15; and, in reference to such and similar passages, 
the doctors of the Koran ask: Was Muhammed not like 
unto Moses? Did he not come from Israel’s brethren, from 
the children of Ishmael? Is there not, in the Hebrew 
Scriptures, the prophecy, and here, in the rise of Muhammed, 
the fulfilment? Are there not, in the old Bible, the types, 
and here, in the new Koran, the antitypes? Did not the 
inspired men of Israel foresee the coming prophet of Arabia ? 

These peculiar methods of interpreting the Bible remind 
us of the methods which Persian believers in the Koran 
employ in the interpretation of the odes of their great national 
poet Hafiz. Shems ed-din Muhammed Hafiz, as is well 
known, sang of wine, and of love, and of nightingales, and 
of roses—in fact, of beauty in every form. Can such poetry 
be accepted by the ecclesiastical authorities in Persia and by 
the pious ministers of the Muhammedan religion in that 
country? Yes, the odes of Hafiz, so they say, must only 
be understood rightly; it must be believed that they are 
intended as an allegorical and mystical revelation of things 
divine. And so their commentators tell us that ‘“‘the wine” 
signifies the true faith, and that “‘the beloved lad”’ stands as 
a symbol for God, and that ‘“‘the intoxication’’ means pious 
ecstasy brought forth by a deep contemplation of the divine 
works and words, etc. This has, indeed, been carried so 
far, that pilgrims from all parts of Persia now resort to the 
tomb of Hafiz, and almost regard that frivolous poet as a 
saint. (Who is not reminded, by these commentaries upon 


182 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Hafiz, of a number of commentaries, Jewish and Christian, 
upon the Song of Solomon, Psalm 45, and other parts of the 
Bible ?) 

The theologians among the Muhammedans assert that 
their Bible expositions reveal the real and true meaning of 
the Scriptures. If now some of them would face us today, 
and would notice how we shake our heads at their strange 
interpretations, they would probably say: You are too 
superficial in your explanation of the sacred books; the 
“inner light” has evidently not dawned upon you; the 
‘“deeper sense”’ of the Scriptures has remained hidden to you. 
The Christian mystics speak also of a ‘‘deeper sense”’; the 
Jewish Kabbalists speak likewise of mysteries, Sdédhdth, etc. 

But do Muhammedans alone interpret the Bible under the 
influence of their religious prejudices? Jews and Christians 
also have sinned, and do continue to sin, in the same direc- 
tion. Not that they sin consciously; not that they pervert 
the sense of the Bible wilfully; they err unconsciously. 
They believe that their expositions are the true ones, the only 
true ones. And they have not, and in centuries gone by 
they could not have, sufficient philological and other neces- 
sary knowledge to prevent them from making errors. We, 
rising above sectarian narrowness, must now be ready to 
admit that, in many instances, our own teachers in olden 
times erred, and that, in many instances, their interpre- 
tations cannot stand the light of criticism. Here also we 
may give illustrations. Rashi, an excellent Jewish expounder 
of the Bible, who wrote eight hundred years ago (he died 
1105), explains the first verse of Genesis thus: ‘‘B*ré’shith, 
in the beginning; ‘b‘ré’shith’ is equivalent to ‘bish‘bhil 
ré’shith,’ for the sake of ré’shith. For the sake of ré’shith 
God created the world. Ré’shith is then, first, a designa- 
tion of the Torah; for, in Prov. 8:22, the Torah is called 


SELECTED WRITINGS 183 


‘ré’shith darké,’ the beginning of God’s ways. Ré’shith, 
secondly, means God’s chosen people Israel; for, in Jer. 2:3, 
Israel is referred to in the words ‘ré’shith t°bhii’athd,’ the 
beginning of God’s productions.” Rashi desires, by his inter- 
pretation, to set forth the idea that God created the world in 
order that the Torah should become manifest therein, and 
be a power therein, and for the further purpose that Israel 
should, so to speak, have a standing-place, a sphere for his 
being and his fulfilling his mission in the world. Rashi here 
followed older Jewish authorities who preceded him with. 
this explanation. We now find little to admire in this kind 
of interpretation; we think that b’ré’shith means simply 
“in the beginning,” and that no other sense, no “deeper 
sense,’ no “hidden sense’”’ is contained in it. So much is 
certain to us, that the author—whether it was Moses, or 
someone living hundreds of years after Moses—did not 
think of the Torah, or of Israel, when he wrote down the 
word b’ré’shith. And our object, in our endeavor to under- 
stand the Bible words correctly, must now be to find an 
answer to the question, What did the author at first mean 
by his words? Of former interpretations, be they by Rashi, 
or by St. Jerome, or by Luther, or by others, we take re- 
spectful and grateful notice, but we do so in the same spirit 
and manner as historians take notice of old documents, of 
old scientific views and systems. We carefully examine 
them; we accept what appears to us good and true; we 
reject what, according to our understanding, is erroneous. 
But far be it from us to take everything in them as abso- 
lutely true. . 

We have given a few examples of old Jewish explications 
which, in the light of modern scholarship, we unhesitatingly 
declare to be incorrect and untenable and to be colored by 
Jewish bias. But Catholics, and Protestants also, other- 


184 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


wise quite erudite and quite independent in their studies and 
researches, show, often enough, in their Bible expositions 
the mighty influence upon them of opinions and doctrines 
that were inculcated into their minds when they were young. 
There have been, and probably there are, Catholic scholars 
who find in the Old Testament quite a number of allusions 
to the virgin Mary, the queen of heaven, as they call her, 
and to the almost divine attributes which are ascribed to her 
by the Roman church. In the so-called Protevangelium — 
(Gen. 3:15), where it is said that the seed of the woman will 
bruise the head of the serpent, Catholic theologians found 
the sense that she, the holy virgin, will bruise the serpent’s 
head—+psa conteret caput tuum, as the present editions of 
the Vulgate read, not zpse, etc., the feminine gender being 
used instead of the masculine, despite the Hebrew text 
having the undisputed masculine pronoun and verb (hi 
y*shtiiph’kha) and not the corresponding feminine forms. 
Thus a text undeniably perverted is preferred to the true 
original reading, in order to make a Roman Catholic doc- 
trine more plausible and to give to it a Biblical basis. 

Is it different with Protestant Bible expounders? Are the 
exegetical works of many of them not tinctured by religious 
prejudices and dogmatical presuppositions ? Some of them 
discover Christ in almost any page of the Old Testament, 
some of them find the doctrine of the Trinity indicated 
in the very first word of the Bible—for are not the letters 
beth, resh, aleph of the word B*ré’shith the initial letters of 
bén, rtidh, ’abh (“‘son, spirit, father”) ? According to some 
of these exegetes it was the Cross that sweetened the waters 
of Marah, for is not the numerical value of the Hebrew 
word for “‘tree” (Exod. 15:25) or “wood” (y¥=70+90) 
the same as that of the word (in later Hebrew) for ‘‘cross”’ 
(n5s=90+30+40)? And may not therefore the words 


SELECTED WRITINGS 185 


“wood”? and “cross” be interchanged? With some of 
these exegetes, aye, with large numbers of them, Shiloh, 
Immanuel, etc., are but typical names of Jesus of Nazareth; 
for has not “the Church” so taught it for many hundred 
years? And this is called Bible Science! 

But place yourselves, for a moment, in the position of one 
who had never heard from a Christian pulpit, or from the 
lips of a teacher, or who had never read in a book of Christian 
devotions, that ‘‘Immanuel” is Christ; and then read that 
chapter in Isaiah where Immanuel is spoken of. In such a 
condition of your mind the idea will never occur to you that 
in that plain, clear oration of Isaiah any reference is made to 
a divine savior who would come more than seven hundred 
years later. Before the gates of Jerusalem, in the presence 
of King Ahaz, and of a multitude of the inhabitants of Jeru- 
salem, the prophet is standing. The prophet says: Do not 
despair! Be hopeful! Be of good cheer! The Syrian armies 
and the armies of Ephraim, who are coming from the North, 
and who threaten you, and who, you fear, will conquer your 
land, lay waste your country, and destroy your sanctuary, 
will not succeed. In a few years the danger will all have 
passed away, and you will not be molested any more by the 
enemy. And this sign I will give you. Behold yonder 
young woman (‘d/mah), she has conceived, and she will bear 
a son, and she will call his name Immanuel; and before that 
child will be able to distinguish between what is good and 
evil, the enemy will have gone, the danger will have passed 
away, and a time of glory and of peace and of happiness will 
come for the kingdom of Judah, etc., etc. 

Is this not a plain prophetical oration which hardly 
admits any misconstruction? And yet, not only pious 
women and devout peasants, but learned expounders of the 
Bible cling tenaciously to the idea that Isaiah meant origi- 


186 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


nally Jesus of Nazareth! And in order to make this idea 
more acceptable, they force upon the word ‘dlmah—which 
means any young woman—the meaning, immaculate virgin! 

And in such a forced manner other so-called ‘‘messianic”’ 
passages are explained. Jam well aware that many of these 
‘““messianic”’ passages were already understood and explained 
as messianic and as having reference to Christ by the authors 
of the New Testament. It would probably be improper for 
me to say before you, gentlemen, composing my present 
audience, that the New Testament expositions of Old Testa- 
ment passages were not always exact and correct. To many 
of you the New Testament is the very highest authority in 
everything, and you may say, Thus far a Bible student 
may go, not farther. Where Jesus of Nazareth has ex- 
pounded the words of the Old Testament, or where Paul of 
Tarsus has set forth their meaning, the true and only true 
exposition is given. If a modern expounder undertakes to 
give another explanation, not in harmony with the New 
Testament, he is presumptuous, he has left Christian ground. 

Far be it from me to combat in this assembly such a 
position. So much only I may be allowed to state in this 
connection, that explanations of Old Testament passages 
similar to those of St. Paul and the other New Testament 
writers we find also in the Talmud and Midrash and in the 
mediaeval literature of the Jews. ‘‘Shiloh” and Tsemah 
(“Branch”) were also understood by some Jewish teachers 
of former ages as having reference to a Messiah. ‘There is, 
however, a great difference between the Midrash of the Jews 
and the Midrash of St. Paul, or rather between the posi- 
tion of the Jewish student toward the Jewish Midrash and 
the position of the Christian student toward the Christian 
Midrash. ‘The former sees in the Jewish Midrash historical 
documents showing how the Scriptures were understood by 


SELECTED WRITINGS 187 


the Jews at certain times of the past; and to him, to the 
Jewish student, a transitory stage of Jewish Bible exegesis 
is thereby made clear. The Christian student, however, 
finds in the Christian Midrash, that is, in the New Testa- 
ment, expositions of the Hebrew Scriptures, which he does 
not consider as merely transitory, as merely characteristic 
of their times, but which have become for him petrified, 
authoritative, unalterable... . | 

I have arrived at the limit of the time allotted to me, and 
therefore I must close. The logical conclusion of all that I 
have said seems to me to be this: 

The main question which a scholarly Bible student should 
ask himself is: What was the original meaning ‘which the 
Biblical author desired to express by his words? And in 
attempting to find a correct answer to this question, one 
laying claim to the title of a Bible scholar should free his 
mind from all misleading preconceptions, from all sectarian 
bias. Truth, nothing but the truth, should be his aim. 


CONCERNING JESUS, SURNAMED “THE CHRIST”? 
1899 


1. A SHARP and clear distinction has to be made between 
the historical Jesus, that grand teacher who arose amidst the 
Jewish people about nineteen hundred years ago, and the 
mythical Christ, who is an unreal production partly of homi- 
letical or midrashic explanation of passages in the ancient 
Sacred Scriptures of the Jews, partly of philosophemes cur- 
rent in the Platonic and neo-Platonic schools of philosophical 
speculation, and partly of oriental (Jewish and non-Jewish) 
superstitions. 

2. The belief in an historical Jesus has a real and sub- 
stantial basis. The belief in the mythical Christ, as con- 
ceived by the dogmas of the more or less orthodox Christian 
churches, has not, and never had, any basis in reality. 

3. It is difficult to gain a full and correct view of the 
historical Jesus. The main sources, almost the only ones, 
for the history of Jesus are the. three Synoptic Gospels. 
But these Gospels contain many statements contradicting 
one another, and many legendary ornamentations of the 
person of Jesus, and many reports of miraculous deeds said 
to have been worked by ‘“‘the Master.”’ ‘To accept all the 
legends and miracle-stories of the Gospels as sources of his- 
tory, an unbiased critical historian will hardly ever be ready. 

4. The Fourth Gospel, viz., that of St. John, and the 
Epistles of St. Paul, and the other New Testament books 
are, from the viewpoint of the historian, sources still less 

«This paper was sent in September, 1899, to a learned and very prominent 


Christian gentleman in New York City, in response to a request that I should give 
him my estimate of Christ, etc.—B.F. 


188 


SELECTED WRITINGS 189 


authentic and less reliable for a correct and true biography 
of Jesus of Nazareth than the Synoptic Gospels are. 

5. However, the grand, sententious, and sublime sayings 
of Jesus are, to a large extent, preserved in the Gospels. So 
are his parables, some of his sermons, or fragments of them, 
and some of his other teachings. An hypercritical mind 
may have his doubts here and there, whether this or that 
saying was literally uttered by Jesus himself, or whether this 
or that teaching was truly promulgated by Jesus himself. 
But what of that? If not by Jesus, then these words were 
enounced and these teachings were preached by one or the 
other of his disciples, or by one or the other of his followers 
in the first two or three generations after him. ‘These words 
and teachings bear testimony to Jesus’ sublime thoughts 
and pure spirit, and readily we may acknowledge that, 
though they do not contain any idea absolutely new, yet, 
in a certain sense, Jesus fathered them. All of these teach- 
ings, or at least the greater majority of them, are full of, 
and in harmony with, the grand spirit manifested in the 
sacred orations and teachings of Israel’s prophets—of an 
Isaiah, a Jeremiah, an Amos, a Micah, and of some of the 
rabbis living in New Testament times—of a Hillel, a Gamaliel, 
a Jochanan ben Zaccai, and others. Jesus was a spiritual 
son of the prophets. 

6. For us Israelites he is still more. He was a true son 
of our nation, not only according to the spirit, but also ac- 
cording to the flesh. He was our brother; a child of Jewish 
parents, living among Jewish surroundings, influenced by 
Jewish conditions of life, especially by Pharisaism, purified 
and freed from dead formalism and petrified ceremonialism 
and life-lacking letter-worship, nourished by the words of 
our Torah and our Nebiim; a national Jewish teacher. 
And for these particular reasons the Jewish people can never 


Igo BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


and will never disclaim him. He belongs to Israel. The 
literature which he, not directly, but indirectly, brought 
forth, the New Testament, is Jewish literature. 

7. The New Testament literature, as indicated above, 
contains some elements which—partly coming from foreign 
sources, partly growing out of merely temporary and tran- . 
sitional conditions of Judaism in yonder age—cannot be 
accepted by thinking and truly religious Israelites who faith- 
fully adhere to their own Jewish religion. Of these un- 
Jewish, or anti-Jewish, elements which thus unawares were 
_ taken in by young Christianity and which by and by were 
considered as the essentials of the Christian religion, a few 
may be briefly indicated here: the doctrine of a logos; of a 
trinity; of a mediatorship necessary between man and his 
Father in heaven; of an incarnation of the deity or of a 
part of the same; of a vicarious sacrifice brought by Jesus 
dying at the cross; of salvation by merely believing in 
certain irrational, or at least undemonstrable, metaphysical 
or mythological doctrines; and so forth. 

8. For the incorporation of these doctrines, or dogmas, 
into the Christian religion, the apostle Paul and some other 
Christian teachers in the first centuries after Christ are 
responsible. Jesus himself knew nothing of them. ‘The 
religion of Jesus was the Jewish religion—the Jewish religion 
in its purity, freed from some untenable outgrowths of the 
times and from the overburdening with ceremonies which 
had become meaningless and were practiced mechanically. 

9. This religion of Jesus will have to be the guiding star 
of the Christian churches in their further development, and 
the eternal principles basic to it will finally be acknowledged 
and accepted generally, viz.: the principles of the existence 
of a Supreme Being, a One God who never shares his glory 
with another being, and who is the Father of the one man- 


SELECTED WRITINGS 191 


kind, the ruler of the one cosmos. From this ancient Jewish 
doctrine flow naturally the sublimest precepts for an ethical 
life, the precepts of love and of justice toward all, of purity 
of heart and of mind, of sanctification of words and of deeds, 
of the antagonism to unholy warfare among the nations of 
the world, and so forth. That these Jewish doctrines and 
principles in the course of time will prevail among mankind, 
is an old Jewish hope, repeatedly expressed in the prayers of 
the synagogue and in the literature of the Jews. 

ro. It must not be concluded, however, that according 
to such views all the world must accept Judaism as their 
religion. Only the main principles of Judaism will be adopted 
by the nations—the main principles which were also at the 
basis of the religion of Rabbi Joshua of Nazareth, of our 
brother and kinsman Jesus. Judaism, with its own Sab- 
bath and festivals and calendar, with its own Jewish insti- 
tutions and forms of divine worship, etc., is, as its name 
indicates, a national religion, a religion of and for the Jews 
and not a universal church. _ 

tz. And as the Gentile world will not have to accept 
Judaism in its ninteenth-century garb, still less will it have 
to return, and will not return, to “‘the Christianity of Jesus,” 
to ‘‘the Christianity of the Apostolic Age”’; that is, to Juda- 
ism as it was two thousand years ago. Modern life and 
modern culture are such that a return to obsolete conditions 
of life and to an antiquated state of culture is neither possi- 
ble nor desirable. The Judaism of the present age does not 
demand such a return from its own adherents; why then 
should it be desired of Gentiles? Judaism acknowledges 
the right of a natural, free, and unhampered development 
upon an historico-national basis. How then coulda it insist 
upon a retention of stagnant principles or upon a return to 
conditions of past ages? 


192 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


12. There are some of Jesus’ teachings in regard to prac- 
tical conduct of life which do not fit the conditions of 
our modern world, as, for instance, some of his teachings 
regarding family, property, justice (or rather sufferance of 
injustice), etc. These teachings rest upon a peculiar quietis- 
tic basis, they tend toward what has been called other- 
worldliness, or overworldliness, and as society is at present 
_ constructed, they are totally unpracticable. But such a 
quietism was not rarely to be met with among the Ebionites, 
that is, among the Judaeo-Christians of the first century, who 
in considerable numbers had come over from the school of 
the Essenes. 

13. National churches, unhampered by fetters of unalter- 
able dogmas and resting upon the unshakable foundations of 
a few theological and ethical principles, and not a “universal 
church,” will evidently be the final outcome of religious 
developments. The Jewish church will be one among many 
other national churches. A universal church is but a dream— 
a dream which will never be realized. 

14. Such national churches, fraternally co-existing, but 
differing in the forms of their outward manifestations, and 
each one paying regard to the history and the peculiar 
habits and customs of the respective nationality (the word 
‘nationality’? to be understood in its ethnological and not 
in its political sense)—such national. churches will be root- 
ing firmly in good ground, and their roots will be deep and 
mighty, and their fruits will be sound and healthy, and under 
their reign mental freedom will be secured to each member 
of the nation. For a national religion needs not a chain of 
dogmas, it can grant and will grant to each one belonging 
to it perfect freedom in matters of belief. It will therefore 
be a religion of perfect toleration of and justice to other 
national religions, it will help to establish the ‘“‘ Kingdom of 


SELECTED WRITINGS 193 


Heaven” upon earth. In the words of one of Israel’s 
prophets: ‘‘All the nations may walk each one in the name 
of his God, and we will walk in the name of the Lord our 
God forever and ever.’ 

15. A “universal church,’ whose members are not uni- 
fied by the historical ties of a God-given nationality, would 
of necessity have to be bound by other unifying ties, keeping 
the confessors of that religion together. And what could 
these ties consist of ? Of what else than certain dogmas 
common to them, which the member of the church nolens 
volens would have to subscribe to if he should desire to remain 
in good standing within the church? Many of these dogmas 
would require the sacrifice of the intellect; they would 
produce mental slavery and put men who in their inner life 
ought to be free into bondage to the letter of creeds. Think- 
ing people will not require much time to decide which to 
prefer: religions free of all crystallized dogmatics or religions 
whose essentials tend to create a state of mental thraldom. 

16. The true religion of Jesus, if properly understood 
and properly lived up to, does not demand blind acceptance 
of dogmas. It lays the main accent upon the holy conduct 
of life. There are but very few in all the history of mankind 
who, in regard to world-historic, deep, and far-reaching 
influence, can be compared to Jesus—among them Moses, 
whose religious influence has been still greater than that of 
Jesus. For out of the wells which he dug, Jesus as well as 
Mohammed drew living waters. At any rate, Jesus is 
among the foremost and greatest religious teachers of man- 
kind. He is one of those who prepared the way for 
the coming of the messianic kingdom of the future; as such 
he was acknowledged by some of the most eminent Jewish 
rabbis in the Dark Ages, in times when religious fanaticism 
and obscurantism were prevailing everywhere among the 


194 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


nations; as such he was recognized by Moses Maimonides, 
for instance, seven hundred years ago. And another Jewish 
teacher, Judah ha-Levi, who flourished about a half a cen- 
tury before Maimonides, admitted freely that the nations 
who have adopted Christianity or Mohammedanism have 
been most beneficially influenced by these religions, and that 
these religions, the daughters of Judaism, would finally 
help mankind onward and would accelerate the coming of 
the expected messianic times. 

17. Not yet has the time come when the erroneous iden- 
tification of the historical Jesus with the mythological Christ 
will be given up by Christianity, and when the Christology 
of the churches will not be confounded any more with the 
teachings of Jesus himself concerning his nature and his 
mission. Not yet can the main emphasis be laid upon the 
many important points of agreement between the religion 
of the Jews and of the Gentiles, and not yet can the points 
of disagreement between them be pushed aside as really 
less important. But day is dawning. The world is pro- 
gressing. Darkness will gradually disappear. Light will 
come. Truth will prevail. And Love and Justice will rule 
upon the earth. 


THE WANDERING JEW* 
1872 

And it shall come to pass that, in the same degree as ye have been 
a curse among the nations, O house of Judah and house of Israel, so 
will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing; fear not, let your hands 
be strong. ... In those days ten men out of all the languages of 
the nations shall take hold—yea, they shall take hold of the skirt of 
him that is a Jew, saying, “Let us go with you; for we have heard 
that God is with you.” —Zech. 8: 13-23. 


Every one of you, my dear friends, is undoubtedly 
acquainted with the old legend of the Wandering Jew, who, 
since more than eighteen hundred years, is compelled to wan- 
der from place to place, from country to country, from clime 
to clime, through centuries and centuries, without ever being 
able to find any rest for his weary foot, and who is forced 
thus to wander on until the end of days. Time has been 
when the Wandering Jew was supposed to be a real person, 
and witnesses appeared—witnesses who certainly were either 
impostors or self-deluded men, laboring under some hallu- 
cination—witnesses who testified that they had seen the 
illustrious traveler, and that they had conversed with him. 
Now-a-days hardly any educated man may be found express- 
ing belief in such a gross superstition, and every educated 
man will admit that the Wandering Jew is but a mythical 
person, a fiction of poetry. And yet the same has, in some 
sense of the word, a real existence. The Jewish people 1s 
the Wandering Jew. 

Just about eighteen hundred years have elapsed since 
these people were driven from their home, since they began 


t An address delivered before the Chicago Young Men’s Christian Union. 
195 


196 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


their wanderings, and were dispersed all over the world. 
The nation which had previously dwelt in its own country, 
in Palestine, had heroically struggled for several years to 
maintain its national independence. But finally the war 
for independence terminated unhappily for poor Judah, the 
Jews had to succumb, and the victory was with the Romans. 
In the month of August, in the year 70 A.c., Jerusalem, the 
capital, was conquered by the enemy and the Temple, the 
much revered sanctuary, was laid in ashes. Hundreds of 
thousands had either been slain by the enemy’s sword, or 
had perished by famine, by fire, by pestilence, or otherwise. 
Of those that remained after the awful catastrophe, thou- 
sands and thousands were led away captives to the mines 
of Upper Egypt, to the slave marts of Rome and of the other 
cities of the Italian Peninsula, to Hispania, to Gallia, and 
to other provinces of the vast Roman Empire. And from 
that time the wanderings of the Jew date their beginning, 
and in those days Israel’s migrations took their commence- 
ment. From this time on the words of David may be 
applied to the history of the Jews: ‘“‘They went about from 
nation to nation, from one kingdom to another people.”’ 

Thus far the comparison between the Wandering Jew and 
the Jewish people holds good. But only thus far, and not 
farther. In other points the real state of things does not 
allow a parallel between Israel and the hero of the mythical 
tale. 

What is the reason that the Jew of the Christian legend 
and of the Christian theology wanders on and on, and that 
he never and nowhere can find any rest? ‘The answer is: 
Because on account of a sin of the greatest magnitude a 
curse rests upon him; he is conscious of being guilty, and 
this consciousness pursues him wherever he goes, and 
deprives him of every joy and of every happiness. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 197 


But is this indeed so? Is this not a theory built in the 
air and without any foundation at all? You have every 
day occasion to meet members of the Jewish race. You 
know, perhaps, that there are Jews who enjoy excellent 
social positions, that some have become famous for their 
eminent learning, for their contributions to the treasures 
of science and art, for their literary attainments, for their 
acts of benevolence, for their deeds of noble philan- 
thropy. 

Now approach such a Jew, and say to him, ‘‘Oh, my poor 
friend, how I pity you! You are in such a forlorn condition, 
you feel so unhappy as a stranger in a foreign country, you 
have no sleep at nights, no enjoyment during your days,” 
and so forth. Speak in such a manner to your Jewish neigh- 
bor, and he will hardly understand you. He will sarcasti- 
cally smile at you, thinking, perhaps, that there is a certain 
class of people who stick with wonderful tenacity to their 
notions, be they as unfounded as possible, and if he answer 
you he will say, “My friend, you are entirely mistaken. I 
_ feel as happy and as satisfied as any other man in my cir- 
cumstances. Jam not weighed down by any agony of mind. 
I do not feel the least disquietude in my conscience for any 
sin said to have been committed by my forefathers some 
thousands of years ago, nor do I think that my God, a God 
of love, and of mercy, and of justice, is so cruel and revenge- 
ful as to punish me for such sins, even admitting, for a 
moment, that these sins were perpetrated by my ancestors. 
I do not feel myself a stranger in this country, where equal 
rights are granted to Jew and Gentile. My friend, I do not 
understand you with your peculiar ideas.”’ 

“But,” says the pious Christian interrogator, ‘‘is not the 
dispersion of your people amongst the nations visibly a sign 
of the wrath of God, a punishment, a curse ?”’ 


198 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


‘““No,” is the Jewish answer, “we do not see it in this light. 
Not only that we do not look upon this dispersion as a curse; 
on the contrary, we regard it as a blessing—a blessing for 
you and all mankind. God said to the Jew, when he handed 
to him the wanderer’s staff, ‘As I have chosen thy ancestors, 
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and his children and descendants 
from amidst the nations, that they should know Me and My 
precepts and laws, and should preserve this knowledge in 
their midst, as I have selected them that they should be the 
first banner-bearers of religious truths, so I have now selected 
thee to go forth to the nations, to thy brothers in the Gentile 
world, and to bring them, in My name, gifts and treasures 
of the highest value, and thereby thou wilt become their 
benefactor, their Messiah, their Savior and Redeemer!’ And 
obeying the behests and decrees of his Heavenly Father, 
the Wandering Jew went forth and brought invaluable 
presents to his Gentile brethren. For its salvation from 
heathenism, for its deliverance from the grossest immorali- 
ties, for the possession of the highest treasures of the purest 
religious truths, and of the most sublime moral tenets, the 
world is indebted to—to Buddha ? to Confucius ? to Zoroas- 
ter ? to the soothsayers of Delphi ? to the augurs of Rome? 
to the Druids of Germany and Britain? No! to the despised 
Wandering Jew. Indeed, we have the authority of a New 
Testament writer for saying, ‘Salvation has come by the 
Jews.” 

This is for many Christians a new standpoint from which 
to view Israel’s place in history. But it is the standpoint 
which Israelites are wont to take. And history justifies this 
standpoint as being the correct one, and supports the 
Israelitish view. 

What has just been said, will become more clear when we 
consider what kind of treasures and of gifts Israel, the Wan- 


SELECTED WRITINGS 1Q9Q 


derer, had to offer, and did offer, to his brethren, to the Gen- 
tiles, to mankind. And to this consideration let us now 
proceed. 

The first present made by poor Wandering Israel to his 
Gentile brethren is a Book, a plain, simple book. It is not un- 
usual that a person gives a book as a present to a promising 
child, to a beloved friend, to a dear relative. But although 
such a gift-book might contain poetry of the highest order, 
might be illustrated with pictures of truly artistic worth, 
might be bound in the most splendid manner, can it in any 
way be compared to the book which Israel has presented to 
mankind? You know what book I mean. It is the Book— 
the Bible. 

“Bible” is a word of Greek derivation, meaning ‘‘book.”’ 
But, properly speaking, the Bible is not a mere book, it is a 
literature. It is the literature of Israel, containing:the liter- 
ary remains of the chosen people, parts of which date back 
to the remotest antiquity, to the times of Moses and of 
Israel’s wanderings in the Arabian wilderness, and parts of 
which originated in later periods, some even in the times of 
the Maccabees, in the second and first centuries before 
Christ. 

Let me say here, before I proceed, that, if I speak of the 
Bible, I mean the Old Testament, which alone is regarded as 
canonical by the Jews. But also in the books of the New 
Testament we have the work of Jewish authors, and a Jew- 
ish spirit pervades them to a great extent. 

Now you may ask, ‘‘ Why is so much stress laid upon the 
importance of this book, or, to express it more correctly, of 
this literature? Isit on account of its antiquity? See here 
the Vedas of the Hindus, or the Zend Avesta of the Parsees, 
or the Holy Scriptures of the Chinese; read there, on those 
bricks of Nineveh and of Babylon, in yonder wedge-shaped 


200 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


inscriptions, whole cyclopedias of science; look at these 
books, containing the Homeric songs, the philosophical 
speculations of the earliest thinkers of blessed Greece; see, 
these are books, literatures, remnants of literatures, as old, 
in part older, than the Hebrew Bible. Why, then, are we 
to pay special veneration to this Bible ?”’ 

My friends, it is not on account of its age that we claim 
respect and reverence for the Jewish Bible. It is on account 
of the truly divine spirit that breathes through all its pages, 
and on account of the immense wholesome influence it had 
upon the origin and the formation of the leading religious 
and moral ideas prevailing now in nearly all the civilized 
world. Other nations also had their sages, their poets, their 
orators. In some respects the orators and poets and sages 
of other nations may have excelled those of Israel. But in 
regard to the sublimity of its teachings, the eternal truths 
which it contains, the power which it possesses of making 
men better, the great historic transformations and changes 
of mankind which it has wrought, the Bible is beyond any 
comparison. ‘Truly, it is an inspired Book. 

Far from us be that kind of bibliolatry, which would 
make an idol of the Book, and which would demand of us 
that we worship its every letter. Far be it from us to imi- 
tate the example of Caliph Omar, who, after he had con- 
quered the city of Alexandria, in Egypt, gave orders to 
destroy the famous Alexandrian library. ‘“‘For,” said he, 
“either the books collected there teach what the Koran 
teaches, and then they are superfluous; or the books teach 
doctrines contrary to the Koran, and then they can not be 
suffered to exist any longer, and must be destroyed.” 

No, we would not advocate such a Bible-worship. The 
man who is interested in critical research is as much entitled 
to study the Bible in his own way, as is he who reads it 


SELECTED WRITINGS 201 


only in devotion and for the sake of edification. One point 
only we would ask from any reader of the Bible, and that is, 
to enter the portals of this literature with a reverential spirit. 
If, furthermore, we combine with a reverent spirit the hon- 
est endeavor to discover and to understand the right sense 
of the Biblical authors, then the mighty words of the 
seers and singers and prophets and historians of old will 
become true, significant, elevating, edifying. But if we 
read the Bible uncritically, as a child reads fairy tales, if 
we take figurative language in a rude, literal sense, if we 
find a prosaic record of occurrences where the Bible con- 
tains poetry, or bits of poetry, if we interpret as true 
statements of facts what obviously has been legendary 
folklore only, or popular tradition, written down in compara- 
tively late times, many centuries after the events related were 
said to have happened, if we see in numbers of natural events 
the immediate and miraculous workings of supernatural 
agencies; then the deep and mighty words become shallow, 
feeble, meaningless, and give cause for derision, for scoffing, 
for ill-considered unbelief. The interpretation of the Bible 
in the manner just indicated can never stand before the eyes 
of a scholar, before the forum of criticism. But if read and 
studied in the right way, the Bible must and will appear as 
a divine Book. 

And this Bible, this divine Book—Jews have written it 
and the Wandering Jew has given it as a present to the world. 
For the first time it was offered to the world, and laid open 
before the world, when, in the third century before Christ, a 
king of Egypt caused a number of Jewish scholars to trans- 
late for him the Jewish Scriptures into the language then 
predominant among the educated classes, the Greek lan- 
guage. ‘This oldest translation of the Bible, known as the 
Septuagint, is still extant. Through it learned men in Alex- 


202 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


andria, in Athens, in Rome, became acquainted with the 
Jewish Bible. Through it, to a great extent, the Gentile 
world became prepared for the more ready acceptance of the 
daughter of Judaism, Christianity, when this made its ap- 
pearance inthe world. Through it Japhet came, for the first 
time, in spiritual contact with Shem, entered the tents of © 
Shem, dwelt therein, and learned to appreciate the costly 
things found therein. 

Later the Targumists of Palestine and Babylonia trans- 
lated the Bible into Aramaic; others translated it into 
Syriac; St. Jerome and others into Latin; Bishop Ulfias 
into Gothic, and now there is hardly any tongue or dialect 
into which the Bible has not been translated. Now go from 
East to West, from North to South; enter not only the 
synagogues of the Jews, enter also the meeting-houses of the 
various Christian denominations, the chapels of the Greek 
Christians, the cathedrals’ of the Roman Catholics, the 
tabernacles of the Protestants; visit public Christian worship 
in St. Petersburg, in Rome, in Geneva. What hymns do 
you hear sung there? The psalms of David and of Asaph. 
What sentences of wisdom do they utter? The wisdom of 
Solomon and of Job. What laws and precepts do they 
impress upon the minds of the congregations? ‘The laws 
and precepts of Moses. What orations and admonitions 
do they read? ‘The orations and admonitions of Isaiah, of 
Jeremiah. And wherefrom do the preachers select the 
texts upon the foundation of which they build up their ser- 
mons? From the Jewish Bible. It is indeed wonderful, 
astonishing, to see the wide-spread authority, the incalculable 
influence, of this plain Book, the Jewish Bible. And who can 
tell what would have become of mankind without the Bible? 

Rome has conquered Jerusalem? Oh no, Jerusalem has 
conquered Rome! Ye pious men of Judah, who saw the 


SELECTED WRITINGS 203 


downfall of your country, the destruction of your Temple, the 
slaughter of your neighbors and friends, and who wept and 
despaired over it, you had no reason to weep and to despair. 
Structures of wood and of stone were laid in ruins; but that 
other structure, erected by the inspired lawgivers and singers 
and prophets of Israel, remained. ‘Treasuries of gold and 
of silver were pillaged, but another treasury, Israel’s Torah, 
they could not deprive the world of. Men and women were 
killed, but the spirit of the Holy Scriptures they could not 
kill. It seemed then as though Jerusalem had fallen before 
proud Rome. But not many centuries passed by until it 
became clear that 1t was Rome which had fallen, and that 
Jerusalem was the victor. And as Jerusalem really has 
triumphed over old heathenish Rome, so it will certainly tri- 
umph over new heathenish Rome. And the time will come 
when all the world will accede that this triumph 1s justified, 
when Israel, the Messiah of the nations, will be acknowledged 
as such by the nations. And in those days it will be seen 
clearly by all, that it was Israel—he of low birth, despised 
and shunned by men, who “was wounded for the transgres- 
sion of the nations, and bruised for their iniquities, and 
through whose bruises healing was granted to the nations.” 
In those days it will be said of Israel, that “‘he was the child 
born unto us, and the son given unto us, on whose shoulders 
the government was placed, and whose name is called Won- 
derful, Counselor of the Mighty God, of the Everlasting 
Father, the Prince of Peace.” In those days mankind will, 
with reference to Israel, break out in one mighty chorus: 
Shout the glad tidings, exultingly sing: 
Jerusalem triumphs, Messiah is King. 

But let us return to our subject. Let us proceed with the 
question: ‘‘What other gifts, besides the Bible, did the Wan- 
dering Jew give to mankind ?”’ 


204 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


And now, my friends, we have to answer: ‘From the 
hands of the Jew mankind received monotheism, that is, the 
truth that there is One God only, a living, self-conscious, 
independent Spirit, an all-perfect Being, all-kind and all- 
merciful, all-just and all-holy, a God who has created the 
world, who preserves it and governs it.” 

At the time of Abraham, the patriarch of the Jews, the 
first monotheist, the Canaanites and the other nations 
amongst whom he was leading a nomadic life, worshiped 
idols. ‘They had their Moloch, their Chemosh, their Baal, 
their other deities whom they served and to whom they sacri- 
ficed the lives of their sons, the chastity of their daughters, 
their virtue, their manhood, all and everything. And not 
only the inhabitants of Canaan, of Phoenicia and Philistia, 
of Edom, of Ammon, of Moab were then sunk in the mires 
of heathenism and the immoral practices of idol-worship— 
all the world waded then through such mire, and walked 
then in such thick darkness. Abraham was then selected. 
Into his mind fell a ray from above, revealing to him the 
nothingness of idols, the reprehensibility of human sacrifices, 
the sublime truth of monotheism. And this monotheism 
was inherited by Isaac, from Isaac it was transmitted to 
Jacob, and from Jacob to his children, until finally this belief 
and faith in the One Supreme Being, the Creator of the uni- 
verse, the Father of mankind, was so deeply rooted and 
implanted in Israel that no storm could uproot it again. 
And so the Wandering Jew bears the banner of his God still 
aloft, and proudly he unfurls before all the nations this 
banner, upon which in never-fading letters the golden 
inscription is written: Shema Yisrael Adonai Elohenu Adonai 
Echad—“ Hear, O Israel, the Lord who is our God, the Lord 
is One.” You could crush the Jew, you could slay him, you 
could kill him with a thousand deaths, but this banner you 


SELECTED WRITINGS 205 


could not wrest from him. You could try it with your decoys 
and allurements, you could tempt him with your sweet 
words and promises, you could entice him with your gold, 
with your offices, with your social honors; but his faith 
in the Sole and One Everlasting God he would not give up. 
And he will never give up this banner. He will carry it 
onward, until complete victory is gained and until opposing 
heathenism in all its forms and combinations has disappeared 
from our globe, until all nations unite in saying: Shema 
Visrael—‘‘ Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is 
‘Otome 

_ And the battle zs won and victory 7s gained—at least par- 
tially. Not that people alone who were chosen by God to 
march at the head of mankind with this banner, not the Jews 
alone are now confessors of the One God, the Creator of the 
world, the Father of mankind—the Christians and the 
Mohammedans are also, more or less, antagonists to poly- 
theism, and believers in monotheism. 

But let us be impartial and deal justly. Let us admit 
that Christianity and Mohammedanism are but direct off- 
spring of Judaism. As to Christianity, you know very well 
that all its founders and first preachers were Jews. In their 
veins Jewish blood ran, and the system taught by them 
was mainly Jewish. In branching off from the main stem, 
some foreign and un-Jewish elements entered into young 
Christianity. It would lead us too far out of our way to 
designate in detail these un-Jewish component parts of 
Christianity, and to point out to you the ways by which and 
the reasons why these foreign elements were admitted into 
the Christian religion. But it may be permitted to state 
this fact, that a Jew expressing his opinion on the subject, 
or even a so-called liberal Christian, would say that these 
foreign elements are rapidly segregating themselves from the 


206 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


system and do not prove to be of an everlasting character. 
This much at least we may venture to assert without fear 
of being contradicted: Christianity is a gift from the Semitic 
Jew to the Aryan or Japhetic nations of Europe and those 
countries dependent upon Europe. 

And with equal right we can make a similar statement 
in regard to Mohammedanism. Historical and critical 
researches made by scholars of the last half century have 
shown, beyond any doubt, that the best part of the Koran, 
the Holy Writ of the confessors of Islam, and particularly 
the doctrine of Allah, the One God, are directly and imme- 
diately taken from Jewish sources. Islam, therefore, can 
also be looked upon as a gift made by the Jew to various 
Semitic and to various Aryan nations, dwelling on the south- 
ern shores of the Mediterranean, on the banks of the Nile 
and the Euphrates, and upon the vast plains of Central and 
Southern Asia. 

The Kingdom of Israel, the Messiah, is visibly extending 
its limits. Let us unite our voices with the enthusiastic Jew, 
when he exclaims: 

Shout the glad tidings, exultingly sing: 
Jerusalem triumphs, Messiah is King. 

Thus far we have mentioned the Bible and the doctrine of 
the One God, and considered them as gifts made by the Jew 
to the Gentile. We may now add that the best and most 
important parts of the moral laws which govern state and 
society in our civilized world are also presents of the Jew to 
the Gentile. Much is our society indebted to Greek and 
Roman civilization. Arts and sciences we may trace back, 
until we find their origin in the seven-hilled city, or in Athens 
and Corinth. But if we search for the sources of the moral 
ideas now prevailing in mankind and shaping their social 
intercourse, their private life, their institutions, their legis- 


SELECTED WRITINGS 207 


lation, we shall chiefly find them amidst the people who stood 
around Mt. Sinai and who listened to the inspired orations 
of the prophets in Jerusalem. 

It is a grave error and it implies an unpardonable histori- 
cal blunder, to style whatever is kind and charitable and 
humane as ‘‘Christian’’; it is a grave error to speak con- 
tinually of Christian charity, of Christian virtue, of Christian 
kindness. The laws of love and of kindness and of charity | 
are of older origin than the Christian religion; they are of 
Hebrew origin. And who will dare to say that the practice 
of these laws is the exclusive privilege of the adherents of 
the Christian religion ? 

And as it is with these laws concerning charity and kin- 
dred subjects, so it is with the other parts of the moral laws, 
regarded by modern civilized society as obligatory and bind- 
ing. ‘They are of Hebrew origin. We have no time this 
evening to particularize and to go into details. But this one 
instance we cannot forbear from quoting, that even the prin- 
ciple of equal rights for all—a principle which is one of the 
corner-stones of our American constitution, and which is 
adopted by few nations as yet and is still rejected by many— 
that even this principle was already announced in the Mosaic 
legislation. ‘‘One law and one code shall be for you and for 
the stranger that sojourneth with you’’—such are the words 
as they were repeatedly expressed in the Pentateuch. And 
this principle was only restricted, theoretically, by one lim- 
itation, viz.: No idol-worship and no idol-worshipers should 
exist in the Israelitish commonwealth. 

And what unprejudiced searcher after truth will deny that 
all the sublime ethical sayings and precepts of the Sermon 
on the Mount—I do not mean those which are so sublime that 
they are against human nature—that all these ethical sayings 
and precepts are drawn from older springs and sources, that 


208 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


they were but copied from the lawgivers, teachers, and 
prophets of Israel? Who will deny that the doctrine of the 
universal brotherhood of men and all the consequences aris- 
ing therefrom are of Jewish origin? ‘That the degradation 
of this principle by establishing different considerations for 
the faithful and the unfaithful, by creating a particular 
heaven for the believers, and eternal damnation for the unbe- 
lievers—that this alloying of the pure gold of prophetical 
Judaism was not perpetrated by the Jews? As the Jogos, 
the Word that became flesh and appeared upon earth and 
that was made to share divine glory with God the Father 
himself, was an idea borrowed from the speculative theol- 
ogy of Alexandria, as the messiahship of the young Nazarene 
rabbi was claimed upon the basis of popularly misunder- 
stood Scriptural passages, so was the distinction between 
believers and unbelievers also un-Jewish, opposed to the all- 
embracing spirit of the Hebrew prophets, and reflecting the 
views then preponderating in the Gentile world, where dis- 
tinctions were made between the members of the respective 
nations and the barbarians outside. In Judaism, at least, 
the germs of universality were then already in evidence, and 
laws opposed in spirit to this principle were disappearing. 

Let us then acknowledge that thus far Jewish ethics have 
gained a firm footing in the world, and that the prospects 
are good that this footing will be firmer from year to year. 
Let us acknowledge that most of the moral ideas now enter- 
tained by the world have been received as a gift from the 
Wandering Jew, this despised Messiah of mankind. 

Our list of gifts made by the Jew to the Gentile is not yet 
complete. We have only time to glance hastily at them, 
we cannot tarry long in the contemplation of each one in 
particular. Weare in the position of a traveler who has only 
a single hour’s time to look at the rich collections of objects 


SELECTED WRITINGS 209 


of art in a famous gallery. The man who leads this traveler 
through the gallery and shows him the pictures names to him 
hurriedly the masterpieces of Raphael, of Titian, of Correggio, 
but he cannot stop long before any single piece and devote to 
the contemplation of it as much time as would be desirable. 

We have a similar experience in attempting to enu- 
merate the gifts of the Jew to the world in one single lecture. 
Therefore we shall only very briefly mention now that in the 
so-called Dark Ages Jews have fostered and preserved science 
for the world. Their Ibn Gabirol, their Judah ha-Levi, their 
Moses Maimonides, Levi ben Gershon, David Kimchi, and 
hundreds of others cultivated every branch of science, and 
at their feet the most eminent teachers of mediaeval Chris- 
tian Europe sat as learners. They had their dark ages, too, 
the poor, persecuted Jews, but they had no dark ages in the 
sense in which the Christian nations of Europe had them. 
And when in the fifteenth century a better morning began to 
dawn, it was the Jew who stood ready to say to the world 
awaking from its slumbers, ‘‘While you have slept, I was 
awake. I have worked mentally. I have also worked for 
you. Come now and quench your thirst after science at 
these springs, part of which I have guarded from being 
lost forever, and part of which I have digged anew.” 

And in this connection let us say that the Jew contributed 
also to the reformation of the Church in Germany, although 
but passively and indirectly. Hebrew, the language of our 
Bible (the Old Testament) was totally forgotten in the 
Christian world. And not until toward the end of the 
fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century did a 
few Christians begin to study the old tongue, under the 
guidance of Jewish teachers. These instructions in Hebrew 
imparted by Jews to Reuchlin and others, were of world’ 
historic consequence. Instructors and pupils did not have 


210 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


and could not have, any idea of the great importance of 
these lessons. To them they were only single, detached, 
insignificant facts, of which scarcely any person took notice. 
We—living more than three centuries later—see them in 
another light. We behold in them links in the great chain 
of history; we know now what immense results sprang 
therefrom. Thus works Providence, thus works God in 
history, by little unobserved facts and things, and we, short- 
sighted men, we pass by and do not see anything. 

But more still is to be said in this connection. In the 
beginning of the sixteenth century the Dominicans—a reli- 
gious order known for its bigotry and fanaticism—com- 
menced a crusade against all Hebrew books, all the immense 
Hebrew literature. In this impending danger the German 
Jews implored the Emperor to come to the rescue of their 
literary treasures. And the Emperor asked the opinion 
of Reuchlin. Of course Reuchlin, who had learned to appre- 
clate the Hebrew language and literature, declared himself 
in favor of saving the productions of the Jewish mind, and 
so he thwarted the plans of the Dominicans. This enraged 
them and their dark associates furiously. A literary con- 
troversy of very great dimensions and of a very exciting 
character followed, in which all Germany took part. Here 
the virt obscuri—the obscure men—of the Church, there the 
men of light, of free research, of unfettered mind; here the 
monk, there the scholar; here mediaeval darkness, there the 
dawning of new morn; here Hoogstraten and Pfefferkorn, 
there Reuchlin and Ulrich von Hutten. The war, which 
was bitter and vehement on both sides, lasted several years. 
When, a few years later, Martin Luther inaugurated the 
movement for a,reformation of the Church, he found the Ger- 
man people prepared for the movement by the previous war 
against the obscurants. Who knows whether the steps of 


SELECTED WRITINGS 211 


Luther would have been crowned by success, had not the fight 
against the obscurants taken place just a little while before? 

Were we now, my dear friends, to descend to more recent 
times, we could easily show that the Jew contributed his full 
share toward building up our present state of culture and 
civilization. Not long ago he was everywhere rudely re- 
jected when he came and offered his stone to the building. 
In many semi-barbarian countries whose inhabitants call 
themselves civilized, he is still rejected, driven aside, and 
chased away by the builders. But let every impartial man 
say, whether the Jew has not done wonderfully in the short 
time he has been allowed to work conjointly with others. 
I will not detain you by reading a long list of truly brilliant 
Jewish names whose bearers have excelled in science, in art, 
in the republic of letters, in the realm of statesmanship, in 
the fields of industry, etc., etc. To draw up such a list 
would indeed be an easy task. 

Let this suffice, however. Wetrust that we have made it 
clear that the Wandering Jew does not go through the world 
laden with a curse, but is sent to the nations to bring them 
invaluable gifts and to be a blessing unto them. Let us deal 
justly with the Jew. Let the Jew be looked upon by the 
Gentiles as their elder brother who has some claim upon the 
thanks of his younger brethren, and let fraternal feelings 
toward him be a living sentiment in the hearts of all. For 
have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us? 
One God, one mankind, one brotherhood! ‘This must be the 
watchword of the future, the guiding idea of mankind saved. 
Come, then, all of you; come, then, Jew and Gentile, Unita- 
rian and Trinitarian, Episcopalian and Puritan; come, then, 
let us join hands and hearts, and let us exclaim in harmony, 
‘‘We are all brothers, and He in heaven is our common 
Father.” And let every one that hath breath praise the 
Lord. Hallelujah! 


JEWISH THESES 


IQOL 
FIRST SERIES 


I 


‘““JupAIsM”’ and “‘ Jewish religion” are not synonymous 
terms. “Judaism” is more comprehensive than “ Jewish 
religion,”’ for ‘‘ Jewish religion”’ is only a part of ‘‘ Judaism.” 
Judaism 1s the composite of the collected thoughts, sentiments, 
and efforts of the Jewish people. In other words, Judaism 
is the sum total of all the manifestations of the distinctively 
Jewish national spirit. 


II 


The Jewish religion is, then, only a part of Judaism, 
though by far its most important part. Among no other 
people on earth has religion occupied so large, so significant 
a place in their spiritual life, as it has among the Jews. 
But besides religion there were, and there still are, other 
elements in Judaism. 


Iil 


If we were to understand by the term Judaism only the 
Jewish religion and nothing more, and if the word Jew sig- 
nified only one who confesses the Jewish religion and in that 
alone was differentiated from non-Jews, then no historian of 
Judaism as such would be justified in selecting as the sub- 
ject of his investigations or as material for literary presen- 

* Translated from Jiidische Thesen. This translation is based chiefly on the 
1903 edition of the essay, which differs very slightly from that of 1gor. 


2 2, 


SELECTED WRITINGS 213 


tation the copious literature written by Jews in the Middle 
Ages on medicine, mathematics, astronomy, chess, etc. On 
the same premises, Siisskind of Trimberg would as little 
deserve a place in the history of Judaism as Walther von 
der Vogelweide in a history of the Christian religion or the 
Christian church. There would be no more reason to men- 
tion the sculptor Antokolsky in a work on Jews and Judaism 
than to mention Thorwaldsen in a work on Christianity or 
the Church. And it may even be questioned whether one 
would be justified in referring in a history of Jewish litera- 
ture to the Mulloth ha-Higgayon of Maimonides, or to the 
Mishnath ha-Middoth, that anonymous treatise on geometry 
which dates from the ninth or tenth century. 


IV 


If it be true that the Jews constitute merely a religious 
community or a church, and not primarily a people, a race, 
a nation, or whatever one may please to call it, why, in a 
history of Jews and Judaism, should reference be made to 
the Jews who played a part in the discovery of America, or 
to those who, in more recent times, have attained name and 
fame as statesmen or as musicians, or who have distinguished 
themselves in other fields of art or science? And why, if the 
above statement is correct, should our Jewish newspapers 
proclaim so loudly and emphatically and jubilantly that 
His Majesty, the German Emperor, has conferred upon this 
or that Jewish merchant the Order of the Red Eagle of the 
Fourth Class, or that he has graciously deigned to allow this 
or that venerable Jewish scholar to be designated hence- 
forth by the title ‘‘Professor,”’ or that, in a city of the 
United States, one of “our people” had again been elected 
mayor? What have such things to do with the Jewish 
religion ? 


214 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


V 


The Jewish people, or the Jewish race, is the fixed, the 
permanent, the necessary sub-stratum, the essence, the 
substance. The Jewish religion is that which inheres in and 
qualifies this substance—an “‘accident,”’ as logicians would 
term it. The concept ‘‘ Judaism,” in its narrower sense, as 
religion, may therefore be correctly and adequately defined 
in these words: Judaism 1s the religion of the Jews. As to 
the content of this religion, that is a different matter. 


VI 


Judaism is not a universal religion. Rightly understood, 
it is a national religion. Without Jews, there would be no 
Judaism. 

VII 


But Judaism contains certain universal elements, certain 
absolute and eternal truths. It holds that certain meta- 
physical propositions which have found expression and 
acceptance among the Jewish people and certain ethical 
principles which they have adopted are destined to become 
the common property of the whole world, and it cherishes 
the hope that they will indeed become the possession of 
all peoples at some future time. 


VII 


But Judaism is not limited to these universal elements, 
which in part, at least, are already acknowledged by other 
peoples. It has, of necessity, manifested itself outwardly 
in various ways: through a special ritual, through certain 
established national festivals and days of consecration, 
through definite national symbols and ceremonies. ‘The 
selection of the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath 


SELECTED WRITINGS 215 


Day, the Jewish festivals, the Jewish calendar, and the 
like—these are elements in the Jewish religion which are 
national only; they have no universal character, and it 
would be folly to claim for them universal recognition. 


IX 


If we were to remove from Judaism all that is nationally 
Jewish, the traditional Sabbath and festivals, the features 
of our ritual that are still generally observed throughout 
Israel, and should limit ourselves to that which is called 
the eternal, the unchanging, the universal in Judaism, then 
indeed we would have a church or religious fellowship which 
would rest on the basis of Theism, and would teach and 
demand the loftiest ethics. Then we would have a world- 
religion such as is desired by those who dispute the proposi- 
tion that Judaism is primarily a racial community and who 
would substitute for this, as a fundamental principle, 
the proposition that Judaism is a religion and nothing more 
than a religion. 


xX 


But if we assent to this reasoning, are we not compelled 
to draw the logical conclusions therefrom? There are 
already a very large number of Jews racially bound to us 
who have not joined any Jewish congregation and who do 
not wish to join any; or who have become affiliated with 
liberal religious organizations the members of which are 
not exclusively of Jewish stock. These men say that for 
those Jews who emphatically repudiate the theory of Jewish 
racial unity and who deny that any racial difference exists 
between Jews and people of other nationalities, and likewise 
for those Jews among whom Jewish national sentiment has 
entirely disappeared, there is not the slightest reason for 


216 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


preserving anything nationally Jewish or for continuing to 
maintain any barriers between Jewish and non-Jewish 
theists; that these barriers should be permitted to fall, and 
that we should, indeed, do what we can to hasten their 
complete destruction. 
XI 

Judaism confined within national limits, as a national 
church, rests upon much firmer and sounder foundations 
than would be the case if it expanded and became a so- 
called world-religion. In the Jewish national religion, it is 
community with the Jewish stock, that is, birth within the 
Jewish race, that constitutes the bond which unites and 
holds its members together; within this, however, there can 
exist the broadest freedom of thought and research for the 
individual, the widest room for free and full development for 
the church as a whole. There is no necessity, in a national 
church, for a definitely formulated system of dogmas. The 
religion of the ancient Greeks had no fixed dogmas, nor was 
there in the old Germanic religion any “credo” or cate- 
chism. If these ancient national religions had not been 
displaced by the Christian world-religion and its accom- 
panying dogmas, advancing culture and increasing knowl- 
edge would have worked here also as liberators and would 
have freed them from the errors and absurdities of their 
time. And thus they too would have attained the heights 
of clarity and truth. 

XII 


Also in non-Jewish religious organizations which are 
free from dogmatic constraint, the ritual and other forms 
are determined inevitably by the geographical and historical 
conditions of the people among whom they exist. In the 
far North the fir tree and not the palm branch is used for 


SELECTED WRITINGS 217 


ritual purposes; in a warmer country the reverse is the case. 
In North America the harvest festival is celebrated in 
October or November; in Argentina or Brazil, in March or 
April. In the United States it is the fourth of July which 
we dedicate to the idea of liberty, while in France it is the 
fourteenth of July; among the Jews, however, and only 
among the Jews, it is the fifteenth day of Nisan. Such 
liberal religious fellowships, nationally distinct but alike in 
essentials, can and will exist side by side in friendship and 
harmony, co-operating each with the other in a spirit of 
mutual helpfulness. ‘‘ Wenn die Rose selbst sich schmiickt, 
schmiickt sie auch den Garten.” And each national 
religion, developing in purity and truth, and influencing for 
good the nation to which it belongs, contributes at the same 
time to the advancement of all mankind. 


XITT 


A so-called universal religion would expose humanity to 
a serious danger. For this religion would have the tendency 
to forge spiritual chains which would hinder freedom of 
thought and effort in many ways, and would also prevent 
its own development. For the confessors of such a religion 
must necessarily have something in common, and what could 
this be but an obligatory system of dogmas? But where 
there are dogmas there are heretics; and where there are 
heretics there are heresy trials; and after heresy trials 
follow the dismissal of religious leaders, excommunication, 
etc. And the soil is then prepared for intolerance, fanati- 
cism, and other poisonous growths. 


XIV 


The final triumph of Judaism will not be the making 
over of all men into Jews—that is impossible, for humanity 
will ever and always be divided into races and nations. It 


218 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


will consist in the universal recognition of the eternal truths 
of Theism and its lofty ethical demands for holiness of life; 
in the universal acknowledgment of these truths as ideal 
forces which must control all life. 


SECOND SERIES 
I 


The Jew is born a Jew. It is not through any special 
ceremony of initiation that the child of Jewish parents is 
admitted into the Jewish community; nor can he withdraw 
through any act of his own from this community. In 
consequence of his birth he is and remains a Jew until the 
day of his death. 

How often of late has this proposition been repeated 
without any conception of its real meaning and significance! 
Not so in the case of Aub and Einhorn, Jellinek and Stein. 
They and many other prominent Jewish theologians, in 
catechisms and sermons, in Gutachien and other articles, 
gave it complete and emphatic approval, and did so in. 
perfect—and conscious—accord with a recognized ethno- 
logical fact and with the teaching of Judaism at all times. 
This fact and its corresponding principle are: The Jews are 
a distinct race, and every Jew (with the exception, of course, 
of proselytes) is born into the race. 


II 


Ethnology and anthropology furnish us also with the 
fundamental, almost axiomatic, principle that every human 
being enters the world as an individual; that he is at the 
same time the child of his parents, a member of a family, of 
a clan, a race, and finally of all humanity. This is the 
order of nature, and our personal opinions and assertions 
do not alter it in the slightest degree. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 219 


III 


As regards the teachings of Judaism in past times, we 
find that, according to the Bible, the Jews, or more correctly 
the descendants of the patriarch Jacob, were beyond ques- 
tion a distinct race. The eleventh chapter of Genesis gives 
us the genealogy of the Patriarchs, who, together with their 
descendants, are there designated B’nai Shem, Sons of 
Shem, Semites. Other tribes mentioned here, or their 
supposed ancestors, are called, some Hamites, some Japhet- 
ites. In this Biblical ethnology all mankind are conceived 
to be descendants of Noah, and are called B’nai Noach, Sons 
of Noah, Noachides. And those who observe the seven 
Noachian laws are accorded a higher place by the Halachah 
in several respects than are other Noachides who devote 
themselves to gross idolatry. 


IV 


The division of mankind into Semites, Hamites, and 
_ Japhetites was regarded as scientifically correct throughout 
the Middle Ages and up to the middle of the eighteenth 
century. As with scholastic philosophy, that of Jews 
and Christians alike, so with science. The exact sciences 
could not free themselves from the tyrannical rule of the- 
ology, ‘‘queen of all the sciences.’’ Consequently this 
Biblical-ethnological division of mankind remained undis- 
turbed until so late a day. 


V 


Even if the word “‘Semite”’ does not actually appear in 
European literature before the eighteenth century, as has 
been maintained by authorities of note, its equivalents cer- 
tainly had been in use; for the concept, and the fact under- 
lying the concept, had existed for three thousand years. 


220 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


En passant, anti-Semitism also, both concept and fact, is 
very old. The circumstance of Renan’s coining the word 
in the middle of the last century (if indeed he did coin it) 
does not affect the truth of this statement. It will hardly 
be said that Renan, mild, noble, and humane, was the father 
of anti-Semitism, nor was he the man to countenance it. 
He hated it. 
VI 

The Prophetical portions of the Bible and the Hagiographa 
also conceive Israel to be a race, a nation. ‘The same is true 
of all our prayer-books and other liturgical works up to the 
present time. Proofs of this are so numerous and so well- 
known that it is unnecessary to adduce examples. 


Vil 


But what is the attitude of the Talmud and the rabbis 
concerning the question? So clear were their views, so 
decided were their teachings on the subject, and the regula- 
tions made by them, that they considered even an apostate 
to be a Jew until the end of his life—though of course a 
sinful Jew, a stain upon the family honor. For, they argued, 
quite logically, how is it possible to withdraw from a family 
or a nation in which one has been placed by nature, or, to 
use the language of theology, by God? One can withdraw 
from an association created by men, into which, willingly 
or unwillingly, one has been received by the act of the 
association; not, however, from one’s family or race. Now 
race and religion being inseparable in Israel, according to 
the Talmud and the rabbis, the regulations which governed 
the conduct of the orthodox Jew were held to be equally 
binding in the case of the apostate—for he was a Jew. For 
this reason, one was forbidden to employ an apostate for 
work on the Sabbath, or to offer or sell him food that was 


SELECTED WRITINGS 221 


not kosher, or in any other way cause him to act contrary 
to Jewish law. The apostate, if the occasion arose, was 
obliged to obtain a bill of divorce drawn up strictly according 
to the law, or, in the case of a levirate marriage, he had to 
follow the regular procedure for relieving him of his obliga- 
tions, if the woman in question wished to be regarded as 
a gerushah, or a chaluzah. Otherwise, she would still be 
bound to him, the “Jew.” 


Vill 


And the proselyte, the ger zedek? Was he not a Jew, 
a Jew in all respects, the same as if he were born into the 
race? No, he was not. To prove this briefly, suppose it 
becomes the duty of a beth-din (a Jewish court of three) in 
Warsaw or Cracow, or, let us say, in New York or Chicago, 
to consider the granting of a ritual divorce, or to preside at 
the ceremony incidental to the release of the persons con- 
cerned from the obligation of the levirate marriage. At the 
formation of the beth-din a man is present who is thor- 
oughly versed in Talmudic literature and law, and who is 
strictly orthodox in his mode of life. Proposed as dayyan, 
he is rejected by the presiding rabbi. “‘Rabbi Warder 
Cresson, Junior, cannot be associate judge here,” says the 
latter. Why not? ‘Because he is a proselyte.” True, 
he was only a child when his parents were converted to 
Judaism and he with them; true, his parents reared him in 
strictest orthodox fashion; true, he studied Talmudic sub- 
jects for many years in yeshiboth (Talmudic high schools) 
both in this country and Poland. He is honored as a faith- 
ful Jew, and recognized as a great Jamdan. But inasmuch 
as he is a ger, he cannot bea dayyan. Rabbi Jacob Ettlinger 
of Altona, who as recently as sixty years ago acted regularly 
as magistrate in civil cases between Jewish litigants, would 


222 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


have decided precisely in this way. ‘The undeniable fact is 
that proselytes, according to the Halachah, were not quali- 
fied to hold office. Only one who was born a Jew, that is, 
one whose mother was a Jewess by birth, might be entrusted 
in Israel with an office. 

IX 


In other relations also a proselyte was regarded as on a 
different level from the born Jew. Certain of the Biblical 
marriage restrictions did not apply in the case of the prose- 
lyte. This was so in consequence of the Talmudic principle, 
Sap “pw Nd OM Sp, “A congregation of proselytes is 
not a true Jewish congregation,’ not a “congregation of 
God” from which certain elements must be rigidly excluded. 
On the other hand, a Cohen was forbidden to take a proselyte 
to wife. And there were other regulations of the same kind. 
Also, certain limitations existed in respect to inheritance 
rights which were applicable only to proselytes.* 


re 


In the course of three or four generations the descendants 
of apostates, intermarrying with members of other races, 
cease, naturally, to belong to the race of their ancestors, 
while the descendants of proselytes, In consequence of the 
marriage of their fathers with full-blooded Jewesses, become 
part and parcel of the Jewish race. 


XI 


There is an etymological connection between the German 
words Stamm and abstammen, between the Lation words 
nation and natus, and possibly between the Hebrew words 

* No proofs for these statements will be needed by the learned readers of these 
theses, American rabbis and others, who are acquainted with the sources. It is 


expected that other readers will also accept them without question, especially since 
the sources, even if given, would in all probability be inaccessible to them. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 228 


umma and em. ‘This is a proof that, in deciding the race or 
nationality of an individual, the chief stress was laid, even 
in very ancient times, upon descent, and not upon physical 
characteristics or the like, which a person might happen to 
possess in common with others. In classifying the human 
species it is not the shape of the skull and not the color of 
the hair that decides, but descent. Who were the parents? 
Who were the more remote ancestors? ‘That is the question. 
Granted there are long-headed and short-headed, dark- 
haired and light-haired Jews. There are also Bavarians 
and Mecklenburgers; yet all are German. There are 
Arabian race-horses, Norman draught-horses, and Shetland 
ponies; yet all are horses. There are trees that bear 
sweet cherries and others that bear sour; yet all are cherry- 
trees. They are merely varieties of a species, merely 
divisions of a larger unit. If difference in skull-formation 
seems to provide an argument against Jewish racial unity, 
we would reply to that argument by saying, Granted 
there are brachycephalic and dolichocephalic Jews; but 
consider them, pray, merely as varieties of the Jewish race. 
The conception of the Jews as a race is still correct. 


XIT 


It should also be noted that Jews and Gentiles alike 
have always considered the Jews as a distinct race. The 
philosophic, the scientific, and the imaginative literature 
of the world, the statute-books and proceedings of legislative 
bodies, the commercial and social intercourse between 
Jews and non-Jews, furnish a thousand proofs of the fact. 
One or two illustrations may here be given. About a year 
ago, twenty representatives of the Austrian diet—anti- 
Semites, of course—drew up, signed and formally presented 
a bill, the object of which was to exclude anyone from public 


224 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


office who had a Jewish ancestor as far back as the fourth 
generation. A similar incident occurred a number of years 
ago when Professor Paul de Lagarde of Gottingen, in a bill 
for the establishment of a new order of merit, inserted several 
incisive and characteristic paragraphs to the effect that no 
one should be admitted into this order who, exactly as in 
the other case, had a Jewish ancestor even four generations 
back. It is clear that the distinction here made is not 
between Jews and Christians, but between Jews and Aryans. 
Moreover, it is made not only by de Lagarde, the bitter, 
saturnine, though extremely learned anti-Semite, but also 
by Mommsen, the great historian and liberal-minded philo- 
Semite. However, the conclusions which Mommsen drew 
from the fact in question were totally different from those 
drawn by his colleague of G6ttingen and by others who 
shared his views. 


XIII 


These anti-Semites—it must here be said—display not 
only their intellectual perversity, but shocking moral 
turpitude as well. They are at war with justice, with 
humanity, with true culture. They undermine the moral 
foundations of the state and society—their only possible 
foundations. They threaten the world with relapse into 
barbarism, with brutalization of character and conduct. 
They refuse to acknowledge that, in a state based on right 
and justice, no curtailment of the rights of any class of 
citizens, no oppression or persecution must be allowed to 
exist. They refuse to see that, in all social and political 
associations, the possession of intelligence, integrity, and 
moral excellence constitutes fully as valid, nay, a more 
valid claim to membership in them than the mere fact of 
belonging to the Teutonic or the Gallic or any other race. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 225 


XIV 


The intermingling of races produces, naturally, a mixed. 
race. One can speak properly of a mixed race, however, 
only when the elements which combine to form it are in 
equal or nearly equal proportion. If single families with- 
draw from one race and join another, only the descendants 
of these families are of mixed blood. As the process of 
their absorption goes on, the one racial strain diminishes with 
the rapidity of geometrical progression, as may be indicated 
by the following series: 3, +, 4, +4, etc.; the other gains 
correspondingly: 3, 2, %, +3, etc. Consequently, the 
original racial characteristics of the family are soon lost, 
like a spoonful of salt dissolved in a large vessel of water 
to which more water is continually added. 


XV 


According to the testimony of history, an incalculable 
number of Jews have, in the course of centuries, chiefly as a 
result of barbarous persecution, been lost out of the Jewish 
race and been absorbed by other races. At the same time, 
an exceedingly small number of non-Jews have entered 
Judaism. Leaving the Chazars out of account, the majority 
of whom, according to the recent investigations of Russian 
scholars, soon returned to Christianity or to Islam, not a 
thousand non-Semites, since the first century of the Chris- 
tian Era, or at any rate since Christianity became the religion 
of the Eastern Empire, have entered the ranks of the Jews 
and been assimilated by them. A thousand? No, not 
five hundred. Perhaps not even three hundred. It is very 
certain that the Jews are ethnically one of the purest races 
in the world. 


220N BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


XVI 


Now if some one were to ask the writer of these theses, 
“Well, what are you? Are you really a Semite? Do you 
really believe you belong to a separate Jewish race?” I 
would answer, ‘“‘I am a Jew and an American and a 
German.” ‘But I do not understand. Tell me what 
you mean.” ‘Well then, listen. Racially I am a Jew, for 
I have been born among the Jewish nation. Politically I 
am an American, as patriotic, as enthusiastic, as devoted an 
American citizen as it is possible to be. Spiritually I am 
a German, for my inner life has been profoundly influenced 
by Schiller, by Goethe, by Kant, and by other intellectual 
giants of Germany. I have drunk from the springs of 
German literature; I have sat at the feet of German teachers; 
and I acknowledge with a certain pride, in thought and 
feeling I am a German. At this moment, however, the 
question is to what race I belong, and to this I answer, 
again with a certain pride, I am a Jew.” 


XVII 


Of recent years the intermingling of races seems to pro- 
ceed at a more rapid pace, and it is impossible to prevent 
it. Should it be prevented? Certainly not by civil or 
hierarchical authority or interference. Of course the Jewish 
minority does not absorb the Aryan majority. The major- 
ity absorbs the minority. Considerable portions of our 
Jewish nation are dropping away from us before our very 
eyes. Nevertheless, the latent Jewish racial feeling is still 
so strong that there can be no doubt but that the greater 
number of Jews will continue in the twentieth century to 
maintain their separate racial existence, even in Western 
and more civilized countries. In other semi-civilized coun- 


SELECTED WRITINGS 227 


tries, where our co-religionists still suffer unspeakable 
oppression, the race will most certainly continue in un- 
diminished strength. 


XVITI 


This much is certain. As in the nineteenth century the 
most important problem in western Judaism was whether 
to raise high the banner of Reform or whether, in a spirit 
of loyalty, to maintain unchanged the traditional in our 
religion, so in the twentieth century just opening, the chief 
problem will be whether Judaism shall continue to exist as a 
distinct race and a separate religious fellowship, or whether 
it shall unite with other races and other religious fellowships 
and become amalgamated with them. 


It may confidently be asserted that, in spite of some 
disintegration through the falling away of large numbers 
of families hitherto Jewish, Judaism will in the main pre- 
serve its forces, nay, under more favorable conditions, it 
will flourish reinvigorated and rejuvenated. 


p97 DA MAY NISW WN POND MOND 
“Maya wap 


WHERE DO WE STAND ?! 
1895 


In the early seventies there appeared in Germany a 
book which challenged the attention of a wide circle of 
readers and created a vast sensation: Der alte und der neue 
Glaube, by David F. Strauss. The author expounded herein, 
in excellent style and with a wealth of ideas, the new, non- 
Christian view of God and the world professed by him and 
others of his way of thinking and anticipated to a greater or 
less extent long before his day by thousands of thoughtful 
persons. ‘The first chapter, if I remember aright, bore as a 
heading the question: ‘Are We Still Christians?” After 
a calmly objective and circumspect inquiry the author 
arrives at the conclusion: We have ceased to be Christians— 
the pronoun, of course, referring to himself and his intel- 
lectual following. 

A few years later, another German scholar, the well- 
known ‘philosopher of the unconscious,’ Eduard von 
Hartmann, published his book: Dvze Selbstersetzung des 
Christenthums. Starting from different premises he also 
came to the conclusion that Christianity had passed its 
climax, and that, for a considerable time, it had been grad- 
ually tending toward its ultimate dissolution. To be sure, 
neither Strauss nor Hartmann expected to see the formidable 
“Rock of the Church” seriously shaken within their own 
lifetime, let alone shattered and put out of the way. But 
with profound insight, they recognized the symptoms of 
gradual decline and disappearance, and predicted that a 


t Translated from Wo Stehen Wir? An address delivered before the Chicago 
Rabbinical Association. 


228 


SELECTED WRITINGS 220 


time was approaching, albeit very slowly, in which there 
would no longer be a Christian church; that the religion of 
the future would be built upon a different foundation and 


would uplift and sanctify mankind by different means. 


About a year ago the voice of another eminent German 
philosopher arose in confirmation of the foregoing. Pro- 
fessor Ziegler of Strassburg, an authority of wide and favor- 
able repute, published last year a history of ethics. In the 
preface, he refers to the question raised by Strauss twenty 
yeats ago, which was, indeed, not new even then, but which 
was formulated by him in so striking a manner. Ziegler, 
arriving at the same conclusions and basing upon them the 
same convictions as Strauss, felt likewise constrained to say: 
We have ceased to be Christians; we are the professors and 
heralds of a new, non-Christian view of God and the universe, 
a new ethics, a new religion. 

There is no need to enumerate other eminent teachers 
of this nascent non-Christian religion. We are not speaking 
here of a single swallow foreheralding a budding spring, there 
are hundreds and thousands of them, chirping and singing 
all about us: The Old World is passing in decay. Our 
grandsons and their descendants will live in a new and better 
world that is now taking shape; in a world whose religion 
will have a different spiritual content, a world tn which the 
factors which make for noble human living and elevated 
human sentiment will be different from those which are active 
today. It is not my present intention to discuss whether 
there is any basis for these predictions or the hopes that are 
based upon them. J am merely relating the facts. 

But if thoughtful non-Jews have asked themselves: Are 
we still Christians ? many Jews have similarly broached the 
question, some aloud in clear and unmistakable terms, and 
others in the stillness of their hearts: Are we still Jews ? 


230 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


True, the source of this question is, in many cases, simply 
ignorance or lack of understanding. Men have believed 
that the essence of Judaism was to be found in the Law, and 
perceiving that strict adherence thereto was rapidly on the 
decline, especially in this country, that even those laws hith- 
erto considered to be divinely revealed were being neglected 
by ever-increasing numbers of persons, perceiving further 
that they themselves were being drawn nolens volens into 
the current, they have begun to question themselves anxi- 
ously: Are we still Jews? 

The answer of our hearts is immediate: Yes, we are still 
Jews, and our religion is still Judaism. ‘To this the rejoinder 
is made: If so, then define Judaism. 

Among various replies we hear the following: Judaism 
consists in fulfilment of the moral law. To do justly, to 
love mercy, to walk humbly with thy God—this is the whole 
of Judaism. But if this sentence indeed expresses what is 
characteristic of and peculiar to Judaism, then Socrates 
and Seneca and St. Francis of Assisi would have been 
Jews; likewise every tender-hearted Sister of Mercy in 
the hospitals, every Florence Nightingale on the battle- 
fields, in short, all Christians, professing or nominal, who 
ever gave proof, in lives devoted to the service of others, 
of a spirit of charity and saintly helpfulness, all would 
be Jews. 

Why no, say others, these are not Jews, the definition 
just given is far too broad. Good deeds must be accom- 
panied by the recognition of religious truth. A Jew must 
acknowledge the one and only God, he must have a sincere 
and earnest conviction of the truth of ethical monotheism 
(to use the phrase recently come into common use); in 
plainer language, the belief in one holy God must have 
entered into the very fibre of his being. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 231 


But is not this definition also too inclusive? Would it 
not include as Jews non-Semitic Unitarians, Mohammedans, 
and those Hindus who belong to the Brahma Samaj? 

Assuredly, it must be admitted that this definition also 
is too broad and therefore incorrect. It does not correspond 
with the facts. Channing and Parker were not Jews, nor are 
the followers of Islam, nor are monotheistic Hindus. 

On the other hand, the definitions current among many 
Orthodox Jews and many of the conservative-historical 
school, so called, and other parties which steer a middle 
course, are too narrow, inasmuch as they posit a number of 
laws, institutions, and doctrines as a noli me tangere and dis- 
pute the right of anyone to call himself a Jew who no longer 
looks upon them as of binding force. For, when we look 
about us, we find that there are those who have ceased to 
live up to these ritual and doctrinal tests and who yet are 
considered by most of their fellow-Israelites as Jews. 

I have already had oocasion in the year 1887 to attempt 
a clarification of this question.‘ Looking beyond the limits 
of our city and our country, I saw in my mind’s eye those 
kinsmen of ours in Arabia and Persia, in Turkey and 
Morocco, in Russia and Poland, who think and live so very 
differently from ourselves, who people the heavens with 
corporeal angels, and the earth and the underworld with cor- 
poreal evil spirits, who carry in their heads innumerable 
other superstitions and monstrous ideas, whose theology has 
been formed in part by the union of Zohar mysticism and 
of Talmudism and rabbinic casuistry. Most certainly, these 
people also are Jews—Jews, indeed, to the very core—and 
no one dreams of casting them out of Judaism. 

At the same time I envisaged those Jews of Berlin, of 
Chicago, and of other great centers—Jews who are neither 

1 Cf. Menorah Monthly, 3: 259 ff. 


232 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


mystics nor believers in the Shulchan Aruch, who are com- 
pletely emancipated from all the shackles of tradition. 
These too are Jews, considered as such even by the thoughtful 
Orthodox and the historical conservatives; no one thinks, 
or more correctly speaking, no one should think of consider- 
ing them as non-Jews. Only a “crank” or an occasional 
ignorant person or an occasional Christianized American 
Jew would say of them: They are no longer Jews. 

A definition of Judaism must be found which brings 
together, under a common denominator, both the wonder- 
working rabbi of Sadagora and the American Reform rabbi, 
and at the same time excludes the non-Semitic Unitarian, 
the monotheistic Moslem, and the Hindu who acknowledges 
the one and only God. 

The definition which I formulated in 1887 reads as 
follows: 

Judaism as a religion is a sanctifying rule of life based upon the 
recognition of a single and indivisible first cause which at the same time 
conditions and fosters morality; a vital force which germinated and 
developed among the People of Israel—the Jews. Judaism, further- 
more, is a religion which created, from time to time, such usages, laws, 


rites, and institutions as were appropriate to the local and temporary 
exigencies and conditions of life among the Jews. 


Mr. Leo N. Levi, a highly respected Jewish lawyer of 
Galveston, Texas, has criticized this definition, in a speech 
delivered a few months ago in New Orleans, as too nebulous, 
too indefinite and vague. It certainly is—for those who 
have in mind only a certain type of Jew and give no thought 
to Israel as a whole. The definition is too vague and its 
limits are too broad for those who see only what exists 
today, but not what existed yesterday nor what is in process 
of becoming. But he who keeps before his vision the entire 
historical process will scarcely be able to give a more exact 
definition than the one attempted above. 





SELECTED WRITINGS 233 


And this definition may be reduced to a single brief sen- 
tence which, at first sight, may appear to some persons still 
more indefinite, to wit: Judaism is the religion of the Jews. 
Yet this statement is the only true and correct one. The 
Jews, thank God, have no central hierarchic authority. They 
have preserved, at all times, an individual freedom of faith, 
despite repeated attempts of this or that group to put others 
into spiritual shackles by laying down the law for them. 
Every individual Jew has, in a way, a religion of his own, just 
as, according to the well-known ghetto proverb, every Jew has 
his own Shulchan Aruch. No one denies that those in power 
have often enough enforced their own doctrines in daily life, 
but at least they have excommunicated no one born in the lap 
of Judaism. Even the orthodox acknowledge the principle, 
Nin Dew Nonw "p op ox. “A Jew, even though he 
has greatly sinned, remains a Jew.’ To the truly ortho- 
dox this doctrine represents a cardinal principle. It never 
occurs to genuine orthodox Jews to eject certain categories 
of Jews—in the language of American politics, to ‘‘read 
them out of the party.” To such depths of ignorance and 
thoughtlessness they have, as yet, not fallen. Every Jew is 
born a Jew and remains a Jew as long as he lives. He does 
not enter into the covenant of God with Israel through cir- 
cumcision or Barmitzvah or confirmation—his entrance into 
the community of Israel is effected in the hour of his birth, 
and through his birth. 

The Jews are, consequently, not only a religious com- 
munity, and Judaism is not only a religion. ‘The Jews are 
primarily a race, and Judaism is the sum total of all the 
psychological characteristics peculiar to the race. First 
among the psychological traits of Israel rank its religion and 
cult-life. This is far more truly the case with them than with 
any other race on earth. But Judaism, in the larger sense 


234 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


of the word, is more than Jewish religion. To repeat: 
Judaism is the sum total of all the psychological character- 
istics peculiar to the race of Israel. 

That the Jewish race is not absolutely pure, that it has 
originated in antiquity out of the mingling of tribes, and 
that, in more modern times, a few of non-Jewish blood have 
found admission in Israel—all this does not alter the fact 
that the Jews are primarily a race. The English are cer- 
tainly not racially pure; nor are the French, the Germans, 
the Italians. But despite this fact, are not these peoples 
considered distinct nations? An American nation does not 
as yet exist in these United States, where a great number of 
racial currents flow side by side without mingling. But 
before many centuries have passed these will unite and form 
a distinct American nation of a clearly recognizable type, in 
which it will be scarcely possible to distinguish or trace the 
component elements. 

In exactly the same way there is a Jewish nation or a 
Jewish race, and every Jew is a member of it from his birth. 
It is incorrect to say that Israel is nothing more than a church 
or religious community, and that the Jew enters it at birth 
as one professing Judaism. One is not born a member of a 
religious community; one enters such a community, either 
through solemn parental pledge on behalf of an infant, or 
through the act of joining it of one’s own free will, in matur- 
ity. It is different with the Jews. The child is born into 
the race, and as a member of it he assumes an obligation of 
loyalty toward the racial religion. 

That the Jews are a race is not an ex-parte statement 
of personal views subject to dispute, but a fact capable of 
scientific proof. The entire Jewish religious law has, all 
these thousands of years, been founded upon general accept- 
ance of this fact; all Jewish history—and Jewish history, let 


SELECTED WRITINGS 235 


it be understood, is something more than the history of 
Judaism, it is the history of the Jews—rests upon it as 
a foundation. Our sentiments, thoughts, actions, today, 
the position assumed toward us by the non-Jewish world, 
as well as many other things concerning us, are to be 
explained only in the light of this fact: We are a distinct 
race. 

Our preachers, who speak so frequently of inherited 
Jewish racial virtues and defects, without in all cases fully 
understanding the implications contained in what they say; 
our Jewish periodicals, which by no means confine them- 
selves to religious discussion and religious news, but which 
treat all matters concerning Jews; our clubs, which certainly 
no one would describe as associations with a religious aim; 
our Jewish balls and picnics, which are scarcely to be con- 
sidered religious manifestations; all these testify to the 
incontrovertible fact that the Jews are a community held 
together by the bond of race. 

Many of our reformers failed to perceive this. The 
Jews, they said, area church, not arace. This thesis might 
be acceptable as norm for a new trend or movement in Jewish 
history, aS a program for the future, but it can in no wise 
claim to be a statement of actually existing fact. 

David Einhorn was among the most uncompromising 
of the exponents of the racial view. He contended sharply 
and indefatigably, in his prayer-book, in his textbook of 
religion, in his sermons, that the Jews are a race, endowed by 
God with certain special racial qualities that enabled them 
to fulfil their divine mission, to march in the front rank of 
humanity, and to lead men upward to a clearer understand- 
ing of religious truth and a purer conduct of life. And 
until their high mission is fulfilled—thus Einhorn in numer- 
ous passages—the descendants of Abraham must remain a 


236 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


distinct and separate people (cf., for instance, Einhorn’s 
Lehre des Judenthums, §§ 87 and 89). 

Just because Einhorn laid such stress upon trace he was 
so determined an opponent of intermarriage. In his char- 
acteristically emphatic manner, he said, “ Intermarriage is a 
nail in the coffin of Judaism.” For intermarriage, he argued, 
leads to assimilation; the families of those Jews who inter- 
marry are in most cases-absorbed by the non-Jewish portion 
of the community in whose midst they live. No longer 
Jews in the racial sense, they also cease to be Jews in the 
religious sense. 

Einhorn was without doubt in one respect one of the 
most powerful and most influential protagonists of what is 
called Reform Judaism. It was he and Holdheim and Samuel 
Hirsch who stood in the forefront and fought most deter- 
minedly against the principle that a complex of inviolable 
laws forms the essence of Judaism. They boldly contended 
both through the written and the spoken word that the “yoke 
of the Law,’ which weighed down upon the adherents of 
Judaism instead of uplifting them, would have to be cast 
off. Here Einhorn stands almost alone. But with regard 
to the questions: Are we a race, or a church free from the 
restrictions of race? and, What should be our attitude 
toward mixed marriages? Einhorn was distinctly a national, 
a racial Jew. | 

How different the attitude of Geiger toward these 
vital questions! He, too, was a genuine liberal, and in this 
matter of observance of the Law, of Biblical as well as post- 
Biblical laws, his attitude was, in theory, quite as liberal as 
Einhorn’s. But, in keeping with his more conciliatory 
nature, he did not enter the arena to fight for an immediate 
setting-aside of these laws; he hoped and expected that mod- 
ern life would, of itself, without any assistance from the 


SELECTED WRITINGS 237 


rabbis, eliminate such laws and institutions as had lost their 
vitality. As regards mixed marriage, however, he is far 
more advanced than Einhorn. His view is set forth in Ji- 
dische Zeitschrift (VIII, 88, 89), from which we quote: 


Religion can refuse to countenance a marriage only if it lacks 
ethical foundation, or if it is entered into from immoral motives. 
The Biblical and post-Biblical laws forbidding marriage between per- 
sons related to each other in certain ways are binding at the present 
time only if judged according to this principle. The prohibition, in 
our early history, of marriage with non-Jews rested upon the same 
basis. It was generally believed that non-Jews did not recognize the 
ethical obligations incurred through matrimony; there existed no 
confidence in the chastity, in the moral restraints of wedlock outside 
of Judaism. This view, a natural one in the age of mediaeval oppression, 
does not prevail in any of the religious groups of present-day Judaism; 
the sanctity of the matrimonial bond is no longer looked upon as the 
exclusive property of one religion; love of family and ethical relations 
between husband and wife are now conceded to be the noble fruit of 
a widespread cultivation of the higher sentiments. A marriage 
between a Jew and a Christian, therefore, if legally contracted, is by 
no means to be considered immoral, and religion consequently cannot 
refuse to acknowledge its validity. 

If, therefore, a rabbi complies with the request of such a couple 
for a religious solemnization of their union, there can be no objection, 
provided there are no moral issues. The very request testifies to the 
presence of a religious impulse, which has, indeed, nothing to do with 
the forms of any particular sect, but which, in the sanctification of 
the marriage bond, is concerned only with its broad human and 
ethical character. | 

Whether mixed marriages should be encouraged by ministers of 
religion is quite another question. On the one hand, intermarriage 
would seem to be a step toward the realization of universal human 
brotherhood, that glorious ideal which has ever been proclaimed by 
Judaism in inspired fashion. On the other hand, it must be acknowl- 
edged that a difference in outlook upon life conditioned by a difference 
_in religion is likely to prove a disturber of matrimonial peace and a 
barrier to intimate communion of souls. Moreover, it will not be 


238 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


possible to suppress the fear of being influenced each by the other’s 
religion. Because of these considerations, the adherents of a religion 
are justified, especially if they are in the minority, if they hesitate to 
encourage intermarriage and even provide some slight hindrances to it. 


Thus Geiger. Which of the two is right, Einhorn or 
Geiger? In such a matter, one cannot expect unanimity, 
as if it were a question of historical fact or of science or of 
mathematics. We are dealing here, not with definite facts, 
but with a norm for our action, with official policies, and 
opinions will differ widely. ‘The underlying question, how- 
ever, is: Are we to keep racial Judaism intact or shall we 
allow our racial boundaries to melt away? Reflection 
shows that this vital question is linked with other problems 
which confront Israel today, especially Israel in America. 

Let me suggest a few of these. There is a tremendous 
ferment going on in the religious world of America, and 
the congresses of “liberal religious societies”’ are at the pres- 
ent time the chief symptoms of this ferment. Should rep- 
resentatives of Judaism take an active part in these? Should 
they co-operate, as has been suggested, in the establishment 
of ‘‘liberal churches”’ in our smaller towns, which shall con- 
sist of Jews and non-Jews? Should Jewish preachers and 
rabbis accept calls to the pulpits of such congregations? If 
they do so, there will be heard, from one side, a vigorous 
protest. It will be said, You American Reform rabbis, who 
favor mixed marriages, who are quite ready to accept the 
leadership of “free congregations,’ who permit Sabbath 
and holidays to be neglected, who allow many other char- 
acteristic features of Jewish cult and Jewish life to pass away 
—you are laying the axe at the root of Judaism; you are 
destroyers of Judaism. In the words of a Talmudic simile, 
you shatter the cask, but you will not be able to save the 
wine. The wine will be spilled. On the other side, there 


SELECTED WRITINGS 230 


will be heard voices maintaining that such acts will con- 
tribute toward the glorification of true Judaism, will help 
to free Judaism from its national limitations, and to make 
of it a universal religion. 

And these voices will continue to speak, saying, We are 
the children of a new age, and it is the spirit of the age that 
urges us forward. Waur schieben nicht, wir werden geschoben. 
We must not pass through the world unthinking creatures, 
narrow-minded laggards in the march of civilization, nor 
ought we shut ourselves out by our absence from liberal 
religious congresses from a field of activity which it is our 
sacred duty to enter, because it affords us an opportunity to 
assist in upbuilding—upbuilding in the Jewish spirit—and 
so forth, and so forth. 

We have thus come in American Judaism to a parting 
of the ways. But such differences of opinion have occurred 
before, even in very early Jewish history. Very early, two 
currents were to be observed in Israel flowing parallel to 
each other. Even among the prophets there were some who 
held that the barriers between Israel and other peoples were 
not erected for all time, and others who laid most stress upon 
the continuance of Israel’s separate national existence. 
What a difference between the elevated utterance of Isaiah, 
who proclaimed that God’s temple would become a house of 
prayer for all nations, that God would select priests and 
Levites from among the Gentiles also, and that of Ezekiel, 
who excluded from the temple of his vision the alien and the 
uncircumcised! How different the sublime spiritual aspira- 
tions of the universalist Micah from the narrower view of the 
nationalist Malachi! 

But to return to the present. We are living in an age of 
ferment. It is to be hoped that the age of clarification is 
not far distant. Many things have disappeared, many 


240 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


will disappear, that have endeared themselves to us of an 
older generation, things that are entwined about our hearts 
with a thousand tendrils. ‘That which gives us sorrow may 
give others joy. These are personal feelings, however, and 
neither our sadness nor the rejoicing of others can greatly 
change the aspect of affairs. We are in the midst of a cur- 
rent which we will not be able to stem nor turn back. Let 
us then take to heart the saying of Spinoza, that nothing 
should move us either to ecstasy or to indignation, but that 
we should endeavor to understand in all equanimity of spirit 
whatever is or is to be. 


SELECTED PASSAGES 
ON JUDAISM 


THE doctrine of the one living God is the very corner- 
stone of Judaism. With the same it stands or falls. For 
Judaism is neither Feuerbachian atheism, nor Spinozistic 
pantheism, nor Voltairean deism, but monotheism manifested 
in such historical forms and institutions as were created by 
the genius of Israel. And with the psalmist, Israel will 
never cease to proclaim: ‘‘My heart and my flesh shout in 
joy toa living God.” Forever it will teach that there is more 
wisdom and true philosophy in the words of the inspired 
Bid eins | heers the, source of lite 7.) 0) bhoursendest 
forth Thy spirit and they are created,’’ more truth in the 
very first verse of the Bible: “In the beginning God created 
the heavens and the earth,” than in all God-denying cosmog- 


onies of olden or modern times. 
—Israel in America. 1875. 


‘There is a God’’—exclaims the Jew—‘‘but He is not 
like anything one can see or imagine. He is the author and 
ruler of all things, the friend of every creature, the Father of 
all souls. He wills our absolute righteousness and He must 
be obeyed. He wills our highest good and must be thor- 
oughly trusted. In the deepest of sorrows, in the worst 
degradation of sin, He will never leave us or forsake us. We 
have nothing to do but to love Him with all our hearts, and 
minds, and strength. If we wish to please Him best, we shall 
love our neighbor as ourselves and walk in obedience to His 
moral laws. We have no fears and no restless anxieties to 
lift the veil of the world unseen and the veil of time to come. 

241 


242 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


In His hands are the issues of life and death, and though 
He slay us, yet we will trust in Him.”’ 
—Judaism and Other Religions. A Comparison. 1883(?) 


Our God is one and undivided, and He does not share 
His glory with any other being. He is the highest wisdom, 
the highest justice, the highest love. And this God, is He 
without a son? Verily, He has a son; His son is Man, 
created in the image of God, and God is his Father. And 
this son of God is endowed with a ray of God’s spirit; is 
endowed with a mind that elevates him far above all other 
creatures in this visible world; is endowed with a freedom 
of will in all his moral doings, that makes him responsible 
for his acts; is endowed with a power to overcome all evil 
inclinations, that makes it possible for him to gain the laurels 
of victory in life’s holy battle. 

—The Doctrines of Judaism in Juxtaposition to Those of 
Christianty. 1866. 


Jewish theology has no definitions of God, and it needs 
none. The very names which custom or piety have sanc- 
tioned are no part of that Being Himself in whom the souls 
of men can seek and find their everlasting home. What- 
ever may have been the historical, social, political conditions 
of Israel in its earliest discipline, anthropomorphic ideas of 
God have been either totally banished or reduced to the very 
smallest possible dimensions. Nothing in heaven above, or 
on earth beneath, or in the invisible world supposed to lie 
hidden beneath the canopy of the deep, was ever permitted 
to be used as a symbol or emblem of the Eternal. Not the 
noblest man who ever adorned humanity, nor the most 
spotless spirits who—to use an expression of a prophetical 
oration—surround the throne of glory, could ever be a true 


SELECTED WRITINGS 243 


image of the majesty of Him whom “the very heaven of 
heavens cannot contain,’ and who yet makes His home in 
the hearts of the lowly. 

—Judaism and Other Religions. A Comparison. 1883(?) 


The sources of universal religious truths are: Nature 
about us—the universe; Nature within us—the life of the 
spirit and the history of mankind. The sources of specifi- 
cally Jewish principles are the history of Judaism and its 


confessors. 
—Kol Kore Bamidbar. 1859. 


Thus the Jews lived in Europe, thus they suffered and 
died. And yet they live. The swift tide of time swept by 
the Jew: the mighty Roman Empire fell, barbarian king- 
doms were established, cities were built and cathedrals 
erected, so-called chivalry flourished, and the schoolmen 
babbled—they all disappeared like the apparitions in a 
camera obscura, and the Jew remained. And he remains to 
this day. And he will remain for coming centuries. Even 
if the cohesive powers of race should not be strong enough 
to give him continual life, the quickening power of his divine 
religion will be for him a spring of life from which he will draw 
eternal vigor and eternal youth. 

—English and German Jews in the Middle Ages. 1879. 


It would indeed be hasty to condemn all these ceremonies 
as idle, or to look upon the regard in which they are held as 
superstitious. The time is approaching in which, still more 
so than at present, these ceremonies may be safely dispensed 
with, and in which the distinctive outer forms may be dis- 
continued without the least risk to the faith which the cere- 
monies were designed to protect. But till that day comes, 
we, as faithful Israelites, must stand by our own people, 


244 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


without evasion and without hesitancy, and both by word 
and deed each one of us should own thankfully, if not 
proudly, our high descent and our sublime creed. 
Notwithstanding the great regard which is deservedly 
due to Jewish ceremonial life, yet any one among our people 
who possesses any knowledge and understanding of the 
matter must confess that, however valuable and necessary 
the ceremonies may have been, they do not stand, and never 
did stand, on the same footing as the fazth of Israel. This 
alone is essential, this alone is permanently sacred. All the 
rest 1s expected to perish, or to endure in exact relation to 
its moral value. And thus, in former ages as in the present, 
our teachers were unanimous in distinguishing between the 
essential and the accidental in Judaism, between the funda- 
mental and abiding elements of our religion and the changing 
and transient ceremonies of the same. When we now lend 
word to the grand hope that the time will come in which 
Judaism will be the religion of the world, you will understand 
that this means the glad adoption by the world of the essen- 
tial and eternal elements of our religion, and only of these 
essential elements. | 
—The Eternal and the Transient Elements in Judaism. 1883. 


A familiarity with [Jewish history] produces a greater 
love and a higher degree of esteem for our Judaism. Per- 
ceiving such a long array of noble men and women, learning 
of so many grand and consequential acts done by our fore- 
fathers, hearing how by them culture was preserved in the 
world amidst the reign of barbarity and of spiritual darkness, 
how they furnished examples of endurance, of faithfulness, 
of living and dying for a higher idea, etc.—learning all this, 
it is but natural that a justified sentiment of pride should be 
implanted into our hearts and that such a sentiment should 


SELECTED WRITINGS 245 


become a powerful incentive for us to try to become the 
worthy sons of worthy sires. 
—The Study of Jewish History. 1878. 


The Jews are a nation, united by a common origin. ‘This is 
an established fact. The few non-Jewish elements which in 
the course of the last fifteen hundred years have entered Israel 
have been completely absorbed and assimilated. They who 
have come to us from without have been Jews only in the 
religious and not in the ethnological sense, but through inter- 
marriage with us their descendants have become part and 
parcel of Israel—Jews in the complete sense of the word. 
An analogous case is that of the foreigner naturalized in 
Germany who becomes a citizen of the German state but 
who is not, racially speaking, a German. The German who 
becomes a citizen of France remains a German as to blood, 
but is no longer a German as to his political affiliation. 
Several generations later, however, his descendants, through 
miscegenation, have ceased to belong to the ancestral race, 
and are accepted as full members of the adopted nation. 
(Some centuries must still elapse before it will be correct to 
speak of an Americanrace. Thestream of immigration must 
first dwindle to insignificance, and the density of the popula- 
tion must increase very considerably, before an American 
nation can begin to develop. ‘Today there exists only the 
American people, composed of members of various races and 
nations living side by side, but among whom the process of 
mutual interpenetration has scarcely begun.) 

The Jews constitute a nation of purer blood and more 
ancient than the German, French, Italian, English, or simi- 
lar nations, these having only come into existence during the 
last fifteen hundred years through the mingling of various 
races. 

—Ueber das Proselytenmachen von Seiten Israels. 1869. 


246 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


The Chasidim in Galicia and Moldavia, and others of 
our blood in distant Arabia and neighboring regions who have 
been untouched by modern culture—are they our coreligion- 
ists in the true sense of the word? ‘There are thousands of 
enlightened non-Jews in Germany, England, France, Amer- 
ica, whom we have a better right to call our coreligionists 
than those mystics in the Carpathians and those poor Jews 
on the shores of the Red Sea who are still sunk in spiritual 
darkness and superstition. Nevertheless, we feel our- 
selves drawn to them; we feel in our hearts they are our 
brothers. It can scarcely be said that it is the bond of reli- 
gion which unites us—it is the racial bond, the bond of kin- 
ship, the bond which even the Jewish apostate does not will- 
ingly loosen. It is Israel to whom they and we belong, and 
not Judaism—neither Judaism as we conceive it and which 
they repudiate as heresy, nor Judaism as they conceive and 
practice it and which to our minds is full of error and obso- 
lete dogmas. At most we are willing to admit that among 
these scattered sections of dispersed Israel a kernel of Juda- 
ism lies deeply buried which shall one day sprout forth out 
of mud and rubbish, throw off its wrappings of delusion and 
error, and unfold in radiant splendor. Under present con- 
ditions, however, these Jews are indisputably of our race, 
but can only be considered our ‘‘coreligionists” if we use 
the term in an extraordinarily broad sense. 

—Ueber das Proselytenmachen von Seiten Israels. 1860. 


Let us be united as brethren who in their large majority 
are as yet of the same race. Let us be united in the idea 
that we have been charged with the same mission, viz., to 
be the bearers and preservers of the monotheistic belief, the 
guardians and practical adherents of the purest ethics, the 
precursors of the messianic times, when Judaism will have 


SELECTED WRITINGS 247 


ceased to be a racial religion and will have become a universal 
religion—quite in accordance with the grand visions of our 
prophets. 

—On Authority in Judaism. 1890. 


It is a very severe trial which American Judaism has to 
stand. The raging storms of persecution in the Dark Ages 
did not succeed in inducing the wanderer Israel to lay aside 
his garments of a separate existence. Now it remains to 
be seen whether the sun of liberty under whose rays we now 
live is powerful enough to cause the wanderer to cast off 
his Judaism and to be absorbed (at least a thousand years 
too early) by non-Jewish nations and creeds. 

—Israelin America. 1875. 


For the present we wish to preserve our Jewish distinc- 
tiveness; we will seek ever more and more to purify and clar- 
ify religious life and thought within the limits of our own 
nationality, and will take only a very small part in the 
religious activity of the non-Jewish world. Indirectly, 
however, through the silent, innate power of divine Judaism, 
through the writings of inspired leaders in Israel, yes, even 
through the mere fact of our existence, we shall exert an 
influence upon the religious development of the world; not 
indeed of the kind which is easily discerned by the super- 
ficial observer, yet which will be vast and immeasurable. 

—Ueber das Proselytenmachen von Seiten Israels. 1869. 


There are many persons in these Western lands of culture 
who have become enlightened or who remain so without 
associating themselves with Jewish congregations, and who 
work independently for the enlightenment of their fellow- 
men. But individuals are mortal, and only institutions 


248 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


live through the centuries. Let us preserve Judaism and 


its congregations. 
—Vom jiidischen Schulverein in Chicago. 1877. 


A friend acknowledged to me recently that he was a con- 
fessor of the “religion of no religion.”” The expression is 
less dangerous than it appears. At all events, in the mouth 
of the one who used it in a letter to me, and who has been 
endowed by nature with a deeply religious spirit, it is no 
more than a striking phrase. What my friend was referring 
to was merely the new “religion of humanity.” But he 
and others of his way of thinking do not seem to have con- 
sidered that our Judaism is very emphatically a “‘religion of 
humanity”; that, in Judaism, they would destroy a vessel 
which has proved entirely capable of holding and protecting 
the content of the “religion of humanity”; that many of 
the characteristics of present-day Judaism which do not 
appeal to them personally are not essential but merely 
accidental; that the new vessel which they wish to create 
for ethical and humanitarian thought may in the end prove 
untrustworthy; further, that the danger exists that the 
descendants of the second and third generation of those who 
today fall away from Israel and Judaism may join non- 
Jewish historical churches. 

—Wege und Ziele neuester jiidischer Geschichte. 1878. 


You, my dear coreligionists, may learn from the shining 
example of Adolphe Crémieux that one can be a warm- 
hearted, active Israelite besides being a cosmopolitan. Your 
sympathies certainly may be, certainly shall be, with the 
world. Your love is due to the whole human race. In the 
words of the old Roman you should say, I am a man, and 
nothing whatsoever that is human shall be foreign to me. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 249 


But in accepting this noble sentiment as a motto and guide 
for your life, you are not prevented from adding also, I am 
an Israelite, and whatever concerns Israel shall not remain 
foreign to me. 

Be Israelites, then, not in name merely, but in thoughts 
and words and actions. Learn from Adolphe Crémieux 
that the highest cosmopolitanism, the greatest liberalism, 
the truest humanitarianism can be united with sincere Israel- 
itism, and that one does not necessarily exclude the other. 
And be not deceived and led upon false paths by the glitter- 
ing word “‘cosmopolitanism.’’ With the best of intentions, 
you cannot benefit the whole cosmos, you cannot serve all 
the world. You can only select a very small segment of the © 
universal mankind for whom and amongst whom you can 


labor. 
Adolphe Crémieux. 1880. 


Wilhelm von Humboldt was the famous brother of the 
famous Alexander von Humboldt and the intimate friend of 
Schiller and of Goethe. He was one of the finest minds in 
Germany in his time, a man of the highest literary culture, 
standing in the front rank of those whom we might call the 
humanists of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Of 
him it is reported that once he said his hour of departing 
from this world would be serene and happy if only a friend 
would read to him in his dying hour a few passages from 
the Iliad, even some of the dryest ones, some of the most 
prosy ones, as, for instance, the catalogue of the ships which 
went from Hellas to Troy, and the like. 

To many Jews—provided they are sufficiently familiar 
with the language of the Hebrew Bible, and provided, fur- 
thermore, that a Jewish national consciousness is more or 
less alive within them—the books of the Torah are of such 


250 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


heart-elevating and soul-inspiring character as the J/zad and 
the Odyssey were to Wilhelm von Humboldt, and many of 
our idealistic Jewish brethren say, in a similar spirit to that 
of von Humboldt, ‘‘Only read to me in my last hour some 
verses from the Torah, no matter which verses you select, 
and I will depart hence with more peace and more serenity.” 
—Concerning the Readings from the Torah in Our Synagogues. 


IQO4. 


ON REFORM JUDAISM 


“THE Bible is not the source of Judaism!” 

“It isnot? Well, that is heresy, indeed.” 

‘Softly, my orthodox friend. We say the Bible is not 
the source of Judaism, but we consider it a product of Juda- 
ism, and we concede, without reservation, its most splendid 
and holiest product. But Judaism is older than the Bible. 
Judaism originated at the moment when God breathed into 
the first man the breath of life. For the kernel of Judaism 1s 
natural religion in the soul of man.” 

—Kol Kore Bamidbar. 18509. 


The only dogma which we consider binding upon all our 
members is: Absolute freedom of faith and of conscience for all. 
—Kol Kore Bamidbar. 18509. 


Every Israelite has the right and the duty himself to 
search the sources of religious truth with the aid of his God- 
given intellect. For truth is not inculcated in us by others; 
the human spirit is not penetrated from without, rather from 
within outward shines the light of divine truth. 

—Kol Kore Bamidbar. 1859. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 251 


As long as the prophets held sway in Israel, and the spirit 
of God was the living and shaping influence in the life of the 
people, and not the authority of the written law, so long it 
was possible for old gradually to give way to new. The 
withered coverings fell from the buds on the tree of religion, 
and the blossoms unfolded at the right time. It was other- 
wise after the closing of the canon. Then there were ‘‘ Holy 
Scriptures,” to which one must hold fast. In a short time, 
they became fixed and inflexible. Writings of the most 
varied character, even such as did not belong together, or 
which even contradicted each other, and which stood side 
by side only through the accident of their collection in one 
book—all were preserved, commented upon, amplified, and 
provided material for discussion and fine-spun arguments 
withoutend.... 

The time for Talmudic casuistry is over. One section 
of Judaism, fully conscious of the significance of what it 
was doing, has passed out of the period of Talmudic inflexi- 
bility, and has entered unmistakably upon a new historical 
period. It behooves us now to indue the time afresh with 
the spirit of life, of freedom, and of truth, according to the 
prophetic ideals of old. 

—Beutrdage zum Verstaindnisse der biblischen Ehegesetze. 1872. 


In the course of time the ceremonies, usages and customs 
of our forefathers have become, so to speak, petrified, while 
the great rational doctrines of Judaism have been buried 
beneath the dust of centuries. In the place of dead fossils 
we must again have a living organism and instead of a dust- 
covered jewel we must be able to point to a brilliant and shin- 
ing one. ... Judaism is very little known amongst our 
Christian fellow-citizens, and even educated men have very 
crude notions about it. They must learn that Judaism is not 


252 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


the religion of Palestine, not the religion of the ante-Christian 
era, but the religion of all the world, all time, a// mankind. 
They must learn that Judaism is the reflection of human rea- 
son and human conscience as they reveal themselves in the 
historical development and actual state of the Jewish people. 
—Extract from a Letter. Jewish Times. 1869. 


Is Judaism destined to become a universal religion or 
must it remain forever a national religion, retaining its 
Palestinian character and its Palestinian forms and cere- 
monies, even in chuz la-arez (outside the Land), even in 
Europe and America? .. . Is it, as Kant has said, merely 
‘“‘a statutory religion,’ an aggregation of laws, fixed and 
immutable as the laws of the Medes and the Persians, to 
whose authority one must blindly subject himself? Or is 
it a system of religious principles and truths which one freely 
accepts, and which, like a healthy plant, puts forth customs 
and institutions and forms in accordance with changes of 
time and place and circumstance? Shall we continue “in 
behalf of the living, to inquire of those who are dead,” as the 
prophet has expressed it, or shall we turn to better coun- 
sellors ? 

——Rede, gehalten am 25. Jahrestag der Griindung der Sinai- 
gemeinde in Chicago. 1886. 


In order to strike root and be widely effective in time 
and space, an act of reform must be justified not only in 
itself but historically also. For this reason it is necessary 
to explore the past of Judaism thoroughly, to understand 
it as clearly as possible, and to recognize which of its elements 
still retain their life-giving power before we can hope to 
accomplish anything of lasting value in the present and 


future. 
—Wege und Ziele neuester jiidischer Geschichte. 1878. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 253 


Hebrew in the synagogue is a tie which unites all Israel. 
There are stronger ties, to be sure; nevertheless, this too 
is not without importance. There is, however, another 
argument for the retention of Hebrew. It is the ‘holy 
tongue,” the language spoken by our God-inspired singers 
and prophets, and its sound makes a deep impression on the 
soul of every Jew—elevating, purifying, awakening rever- 
ence. It provides an element of mystery in the service 
which we would not willingly dispense with. Mystery 
within proper limits—we do not say mysticism—has its 
place in the spiritual life of man, more especially in the serv- 
ice which we dedicate to an incomprehensible God. Is not 
the soul itself strange and mysterious, full of unknown and 


inscrutable depths ? 
? —Kol Kore Bamidbar. 18509. 


We must retain our connection with our conservative 
brethren. We must not utterly cast aside all the great tra- 
ditions of our past, nor consent to mow down ruthlessly 
everything that is characteristically Jewish. 

The golden kingdom of the future, the kingdom of light 
and of truth, will be established nevertheless. Only let 
us continue to work to the utmost of our power on the build- 
ing of the temple of humanity—and for the present we can 
do this most effectively in our capacity as Israelites—and 
God will bless our labor and bring about its glorious consum- 


mation. 
Allmiachtiger! 
Vom Himmel schauw’ 
Den Tempel baw’ 
Worin Dich alle Zungen preisen, 
Dich alle Volker Vater heissen! 


—Unter welchen Bedingungen sind die Pforten unserer Gottes- 
hduser Pforten der Gerechtigkeit? 1876. 


254 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


I am in favor of reforms within Israel but not of the 
abandonment of Israel. I do not wish Israel to be absorbed 
—not yet—by humanity as a whole. It is still one or two 
thousand years too early for that. 

—Correspondenz. Jewish Times. 1869. 


ON THE SYNOD QUESTION 


THE word synod signifies an organization which deter- 
mines by majority vote what is right in matters of religion 
and the church, and what is not. . . . Against such a synod 
I solemnly protest, in the name of the American spirit, and 
particularly in the name of the Jewish religion. . . . Not 
majority and not authority, but individuality is our watch- 
word! 

Religion and legalism are not only not identical—on the 
contrary, they are almost opposed to each other. You 
ask me now, if I do not recognize at all the conception of 
law and conformity tolaw. But can you think for a moment 
that I would speak in behalf of lawlessness, of mere arbitrary 
self-indulgence? Certainly there are laws—moral laws, 
religious laws—and these laws issue from the very highest 
authority, from God Himself. 

But let no ecclesiastic, by virtue of his clerical office, nor 
any priestly council by virtue of its self-assumed ecclesiasti- 
cal authority, dictate to me what the divine will is, what 
religion and morality demand of me. If I obey this or that 
law, I do so freely, after having given my inward consent to 
that which is imposed upon me from without, and in the 
last analysis, my obedience rests upon my individual will. 

—Sind Sie fiir oder gegen eine Synode? 1881. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 255 


We find it difficult to be grateful even for resolutions 
“favorable to Reform” passed by rabbinical synods, so far 
as these resolutions have reference to individual conduct. 
We do not wish to be ‘‘permitted”’ anything, no, not even 
by the most enlightened hierarchy, nor do we wish a new 
dialectic and casuistry to assume authority over us in our 
practical affairs. The Middle Ages are dead, and the present 
demands new ways. 

—Review of ‘‘ Die jiidischen Speisegesetze.”” 1881. 


What was it Heine said? ‘‘Wenn ich die Sache mir 
recht bedenk’, so brauchen wir gar keinen Kaiser.” It 
is said that the synod can aid in the process of religious devel- 
opment. But it can also obstruct. We do not need its aid, 
we do not wish its obstruction. We say to the bee, “‘I crave 
neither your honey nor your sting.” 

—Ueber Proselytenaufnahme. 1886. 


As to a formulated creed, is there really a pressing neces- 
sity for having one? Must we have one? What for? 
Many kinds of flowers bloom in God’s garden, and many 
kinds of trees grow in God’s orchard. The best way is, to 
leave metaphysics, speculative theology, dogmatics, and the 
like to the individual philosophers and would-be philosophers, 
to the theologians, to men whose mental proclivities run that 
way. The great majority of the people, as we can easily 
notice every day, concern themselves very little with such 
speculations lying beyond their horizon. There is, we admit, 
here and there someone to be found who has a natural liking 
for such “‘graue Theorieen’’; there is here and there “ein 
Kerl, der speculirt.””, And why not? ‘‘Es muss auch solche 
Kéauze geben.” Let them write to their hearts’ content 
‘philosophical’ essays and metaphysical books; let them, if 
they are inclined to do so, publish catechisms and teach 


256 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


therein their creeds, their Articles of Faith; let them enter 
into the PaRDeS of the theological speculations, as the four 
tannaim did, but out of which PaRDeS only Rabbi Akiba 
returned unhurt, and let them write books about what they 
saw in that PaRDeS, if their mind impels them to do it. 
But upon this we insist: Do not force your catechisms, your 
philosophies, your creeds, upon others unwilling to accept 
them, and do not ask a synod or a similar hierarchical body 
to stamp them officially as the only true and correct ones. 
Concede to the others the right either to accept or to reject 
them, or, if they prefer to do so, to ignore them entirely. 

—Thoughts Concerning Some Jewish Questions of the Day. 


1904. 





ON ZIONISM 


THAT which unifies the widely scattered Jews is mainly 
and in the first place their racial, or—let us not hesitate to 
use the word—their national affinity. It shall not be denied 
that the religion of Israel, too, is, in a measure, a unifying 
element amidst our people in the Golah. But the religion 
has this potency of binding together all Israel into one cor- 
porate body only by its being the religion of the Jewish 
nation. First comes the Jewish nation, and then, as one of 
the characteristics of this nation, comes the Jewish religion. 
(We purposely use in this connection the term ‘‘ Jewish 
religion’’ in preference to the term “‘ Judaism.’”’ The word 
‘‘Judaism”’ comprehends far more than the words ‘‘ Jewish 
religion.”) Without a distinct Jewish nation, there is not a 
Jewish religion—at least not a Jewish church. The Jewish 
religion is a national religion. 

True, there are some universal basic elements in the Jew- 
ish religion which it shares with a few other religions and 


SELECTED WRITINGS 257 


which every Jew hopes will finally enter into the religions 
of all nations of the earth and will be acknowledged therein 
as eternally true. But aside from these few dogmatical and 
ethical fundamental principles, the Jewish religion (or rather 
the Jewish church) consists of institutions, rituals, festivals, 
ceremonies, etc.—we must not forget also to mention here 
the Jewish calendar—which are not of a universal, but are, 
and will remain, of a Jewish national character. 

Another remark I must insert here, in order to protect 
myself against a wilful perversion or unconscious mis- 
understanding of my thought. I desire to have the words 
“nation,” ‘‘nationality,”’ used here to be understood in their 
ethnological, and not in their political, sense. 

We cannot enter here into a more lengthy exposition of 
the thesis that the Jews are a nation and not merely a reli- 
gious community. For thinking readers a lengthier demon- 
stration is not necessary at all. And evento mere superficial 
observers it is almost self-evident that Israel is a nation, a 
branch of the Semitic race, and even such superficial 
observers will concur in what the Bible, what ethnology, 
Volkerpsychologie, history, the public opinion of all the 
world, the Halachah of the Jews, the legislation of the various 
non-Jewish nations, etc., teach us, viz.: that Israel is a 
nation by itself. Politically, we ceased to be a nation at 
the time when Titus conquered Jerusalem and destroyed 
the Jewish commonwealth; ethnologically, Israel remained 
in existence as a separate nation, differentiated from other 
nations. Politically, we belong to that nation under whose 
territory we happen to live; ethnologically, we are by our- 
selves. Thus Magyars are ethnologically a nation by them- 
selves, while politically they are citizens of the Austro- 
Hungarian Empire. Thus the Poles in Upper Silesia and 
in the province of Posen belong ethnologically to the great 


258 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Polish nation, while politically they are Germans. Thus 
the Germans in the Baltic provinces and the Finns in Finland 
are ethnologically to be counted as members of the German 
and Finnish nationalities respectively, while politically 
they are subjects of the Russian Czar. Similarly the Jews, 
wherever they live, are members of one and the same 
nationality, members of the Jewish nation. 

Now as regards the relation of the Jew to his fellow- 
Jews, to the members of his own nationality, it is natural 
that he feels himself more closely drawn to people who belong 
to the same race or nationality than to people more distant 
from him. This is so in consequence of a certain psycho- 
logical law which governs all mankind. 

Let us then continue to maintain and foster this senti- 
ment of relationship between Jew and Jew. Wherever 
Jews, as such, are oppressed or persecuted, let us, in so far 
as possible, lend them our sympathy—not merely by empty 
words and hollow phrases, but by efficacious steps in their 
behalf, by actual endeavors to open before them the ways of 
deliverance from tyranny and fanaticism, and the paths 
leading to a life fit for human fellow-beings, to mental and 
moral uplifting. Caused by such deep-rooted sympathy 
with several millions of our persecuted and suffering Jewish 
brethren-in-race, the Zionistic movement has sprung up, 
and by this time it has become a mighty power in the world. 
It has already proven, in various ways, a highly beneficial 
power, and it is confidently hoped that in coming years it 
will be acknowledged still more as such by all impartial 
judges. It will bring forth great beneficial results—directly 
for our Jewish brethren in the lands of oppression, indirectly 
for the Jews everywhere and for mankind at large. 

The Zionistic movement must especially find a loud echo 
in the hearts of those among us who do not desire a speedy 


SELECTED WRITINGS 250 


extinction of the Jewish nation from amidst the nations of 
the world, but who believe and hope that Israel will continue 
to have a separate and distinct existence. 

We do not charge all the opponents of Zionism with con- 
sciously aiming at and working for the disappearance of 
Israel from the world. But this disappearance will become 
a sad fact, in case the Zionistic movement should, God for- 
bid! turn out to be a failure. What is the gospel preached 
by the anti-Zionistic leaders of the masses? ‘‘ Assimila- 
tion!’ But assimilation leads to amalgamation, and amal- 
gamation leads to becoming absorbed, and becoming 
absorbed leads to becoming extinct, to total annihilation of 
Israel. We have no quarrel with those individuals who 
honestly think that mankind would best be served by Israel 
committing a national suicide. But there are still millions 
who differ; there are still millions who are not ready, or 
willing, to ‘‘assimilate.”” Among them, the majority are 
sufferers—sufferers from hunger and cold and _ sickness, 
from despotic persecutions, from degradation, from being 
hunted from place to place, from being excluded from all 
opportunities to live as human beings. For their sake we 
join the ranks of the Zionists. 

—The Jew as Politician. 1899. 


It is the deepest compassion with the indescribable 
sufferings of hundreds of thousands of my Jewish brethren 
in various parts of the world, which moves me. I see thou- 
sands and tens of thousands of Jewish families driven from 
their homes, deprived of the means for making a bare liveli- 
hood, derided, slandered, spit at, treated as outcasts, de- 
spised as people said to be lacking in the sense of duty, of 
patriotism, of honor, the schools closed to their children, 
the avenues to agriculture, to industrial pursuits, etc., 


260 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


barred before them, and so forth; and this tragedy, a greater 
and a sadder one than any other I can conceive, this tragedy 
should not fill my heart with the sentiment of woe and my 
soul with sympathy ? 

It is my conviction that no other means of aid will be so 
effective as the establishment of Jewish colonies in Palestine 
and the adjacent provinces of the Turkish Empire will be. 
I would have to overstep largely the lines of the space which 
I can ask for this paper in your journal, should I venture to 
write more at length and to give my reasons more fully why 
I consider all other means which have been tried and pro- 
posed as insufficient and inefficient and why I regard coloni- 
zation in Palestine as the very best means, yea, as the only 
means of bringing radical salvation to my suffering brethren. 

It is my conviction that anti-Semitism is of an immortal 
character and will never cease to trouble us as long as for 
Israel or a considerable part of Israel no national home has 
been found. 

It is my conviction that that which some Jewish doc- 
trinaires call “the mission of the Jews”’ can be fulfilled just 
as well, and even much better, if for the Jewish nation— 
hold on! Do not shake your head at this term ‘‘ Jewish 
nation’’; I use it as an equivalent for ‘‘ Jewish race’”’—yes, 
that the mission of Israel can be better served if a center 
for the dispersed nation exists in their old Palestinian 
home. 

It is my conviction that Palestine can become as popu- 
lous, as flourishing, and as good a country for agricultural 
purposes, as it was in the time of Josephus, if the land is 
properly irrigated, if, under the direction of good engineers 
and others, roads in all directions are built in the country, 
and so forth, and that within ten years 50,000 farms, yea 
more, could exist and flourish in the old Promised Land, and 


SELECTED WRITINGS 261 


that Jewish farmers could live there peacefully, undisturbed, 
happily. A report of the United States Consul in Jerusalem, 
recently published by the government, supports this, my 
hope and belief. 

It is my conviction that, if at a future time the large 
majority of the inhabitants of the land should consist of 
Jews, the people in this land could just as well and even 
with more justification be entrusted with the right of self- 
government as the Greeks, the Servians, the Montenegrins, 
the Roumanians, and the Bulgarians have been. The Jews 
hailing from Europe would not unlearn their European man- 
ners of thinking and living and would not adopt Asiatic 
semi-culture; they would rather carry Europe into Asia, 
they would Europeanize Palestine and the countries sur- 
rounding it. The Jewish republic of the future would be 
governed by the principles of Jeffersonian democracy. To 
each one the constitutional right would be granted to serve 
God according to the dictates of his conscience: the orthodox 
Jew could live, in so far as circumstances would allow it, 
agreeably to the ordinances of orthodox Judaism, the so- 
called progressive Jew could live in accordance with his 
religious views, and the orthodox would be prevented by the 
constitution of the republic from hindering him in this; the 
Christian and the Mohammedan would have the same civic 
and political rights as the Jew, and especially the right 
to exercise unmolestedly their religious laws and confess 
unmolestedly their religious doctrines. The Mosque of 
Omar and the Cave of Machpelah would be left in the 
possession of the Mohammedans, and “‘the sacred sepulcher”’ 
would remain entrusted to the Christians. Eventual out- 
bursts of fanaticism would be suppressed by the executive 
power which will then exist in the model Jewish republic 
of the future. 


262 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


“But these are dreams—Phantaste-bilder!”? Be it so! 
Let us, then, leave these Zukunftstrdume to another genera- 
tion, and let us now work for that which is attainable at 
present. 

—An Open Letter on Zionism. 1897. 


The people of ancient puny Hellas had their mission too. 
And how grandly did they realize it! From them went forth 
a mighty stream of aesthetic culture, of better methods in 
systematized science, of true philosophical thinking—not 
despite, but because of their living together in their own 
country, in little Greece. They could never have contrib- 
uted so much toward building the temple of true culture 
among mankind if they had been scattered in the world, 
especially not if these scattered Athenians had been com- 
pelled to live among the Scythians and Sarmatians, in 
poverty and abject misery, suffering from hunger and cold, 
and had been despised and hated by the barbarians, and if 
their children had been deprived of the right to visit schools, 
and been robbed of all other opportunities to rise in the 


ld. 
wor —As toa Jewish State. 18099. 


The Jewish state, as understood by me, will be a state 
based upon Jeffersonian principles of democracy. The 
ancient Mosaic theocracy can not be re-established; nor can 
the Talmudical principles of government find realization in 
the new Jewish state. Christians and Mohammedans and 
others will have and will enjoy equal rights with the Jews 
there, and, the Talmudical laws notwithstanding, the Gen- 
tiles will be just as much entitled to occupy official positions 
and to be eligible as legislators in town councils, in provin- 
cial lawgiving assemblies, etc., as the Jews will be. If, in 
the course of time, the Jews will form seven-eighths or per- 


SELECTED WRITINGS 263 


haps a still larger part of the population, it is natural and 
likely that the majority, or perhaps all, of the offices and 
the seats in legislative bodies will be occupied by Jews. 
Neither the Mosaic constitution nor the Talmudic constitu- 
tion can be in force in new Zion. In theory and in practice 
it will be a modern state. And it will be an ideal state, 
such as there never was anywhere and at any time. ‘On- 
wards and upwards to the heights of the prophetic ideals!”’ 
will be the motto of new Zion. 
~ As to the mutual relations of the new Jewish state and 

Jewish communities scattered throughout the world, I think 
that such will consist only in reciprocal moral influence. 
Neither party can claim or ought to claim legal power, 
ecclesiastical or of any kind, over the other party. But I 
hope and expect that a newly established Jewish state in 
Palestine will exercise an influence over the Jews in the 
Diaspora by awakening in them the spirit of a stronger 
attachment to Judaism, a deeper, purer, and healthier 
religious sense, a lifting up of the minds of many from low 
and vulgar materialism to a higher and nobler Jewish 
idealism. On the other side, I hope and expect that the 
Jews in the new state will receive from their brethren who 
remain in Europe and in America much aid and much 
furtherance in Western culture, in the ways of cultivating 
methodically the fields of science, in the applying of new 
discoveries in mechanics, chemistry, electricity, and other 
fields, etc. 

And so I conclude with part of a stanza in a well-known 
Hebrew hymn: 

Ivay ANANSN "2 (wad lap Msva !yInh 

‘Shake off the dust of the centuries, O my people! Put 

on the garments of thy glory, O my people!”’ 
—As to a Jewish State. 1899. 


264 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


There is no special Jewish message to be delivered by us 
to the nations of the world. Universal high ideals they 
are, recognized as such among the cultured nations every- 
where, for whose realization in the world we have to work in 
conjunction with the better classes of other nations. 

Stimulating is for us the thought that we Jews have to 
occupy a place in the front rank of those who build the 
Grand Temple of Humanity; that we, the members of 
the Jewish race, have to bear proudly, courageously, faith- 
fully, the flag of Justice, Love, Incorruptibility, Peace, 
Truthfulness, Freedom for every honest conviction, Tolera- 
tion for every doctrine subjectively true for him who believes 
in it, and so forth. 

In the endeavors, harmoniously undertaken with others 
for building up the Temple of the Future, the work of a 
united Israel, of an Israel having a political center, will be 
more efficacious than any work would prove to be which 
would be done by thousands and tens of thousands having 
no such center. Israel’s ‘‘Mission”’ can be better fulfilled 
by a Jewish Musterstaat than by a million disconnected 
individuals. 

—Jewish “Weltanschauung,” Israel’s Mission, and Kindred 
Conceptions. 10902. 


I look forward into the future, and see my people rising— 
rising from darkness to light, from oppression to freedom, 
from lowliness to a high eminence. Israel is not lost. 
‘““Barkai! It dawns in the East!” as the young priests 
exclaimed in the old Jerusalem temple, when they noticed 
the first rays of the rising morning sun, the early dawn of the 
coming day. 

—Jewish “Weltanschauung,”’ Israel’s Mission, and Kindred 
Conceptions. 1902. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 265 


ON CHRISTIANITY, THE RELATION OF JUDAISM 
AND THE JEWS TO THE WORLD, ETC. 


THE religion of Christ is essentially identical with the 
religion of Israel. Paradoxical as it may sound, it is never- 
theless true that the Jews are the true Christians, and that 
the so-called Christians are not Christians, inasmuch as they 
profess a number of doctrines totally foreign to the religion 
of Christ. They confess a religion whose real founder is not 
Jesus of Nazareth, but St. Paul, and whose expounders are 
St. Augustine, John Calvin, Martin Luther, and others. By 
this religion they are led to a belief zm Christ, but are 
estranged from the belief of Christ. For in the belief of 
Christ no incarnate God, no mother of God, no dark fatalism, 
no hereditary sin had any place. 

—A Panorama of Jewish History. 1874. 


Neither in fact nor in law has this assertion [‘‘this is a 
Christian country, and ours is a Christian civilization’’| the 
least foundation. On the contrary, this is not a Christian 
country, and ours is not a Christian civilization. If the 
expressions “‘Christian country” and “Christian civiliza- 
tion”’ shall not be considered meaningless, hollow phrases, 
but if a sense is to be connected therewith, then these 
expressions have no other meaning than the following, viz.: 
The distinguishing features of Christianity characterize all 
our public and private life, and the superstructure of our 
polity is based upon the foundation of this peculiar Chris- 
tianity. What are the distinguishing features of Christian- 
ity said to give character to our country and our civiliza- 
tion? I suppose that our protesting fellow-citizens will not 
claim that Christian dogmatism is thus all-prevailing. For 
this would be such a flagrant contradiction of the existing 
state of things that even the dimmest eye would perceive 


266 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


it as such. But they will probably insist that Christian 
ethics are at the bottom of all modern civilization, and that 
their spirit permeates all the public life of our country and 
all our American institutions. Let us examine this assertion 
for a moment. The distinguishing features of Christian 
ethics, whereby the same differ from other ethical systems, are 
love, meekness, submission even to wrong (Matt. 5:38—a1; 
Luke 6:20; I Cor. 6:7). As sublime and idealistic as this 
principle of “love” and of submission to wrong appears 
upon first sight, it is nevertheless a fact that in our sub- 
lunary world and in real life it is not carried out, and can- 
not be carried out, and ought not to be carried out. Not 
submission to wrong, not meek suffering of injustice, but 
standing up manfully for one’s rights, and battling for the 
same, if necessary, with all energy and all courage, resisting 
and resenting wrong with all might and means, that is it, 
and not Christian “‘love” that characterizes our modern 
civilization. 

The modern world regards it even as a moral duty for 
every man thus to battle for his rights; for, in standing up 
for his own rights the individual assists in better securing 
for human society right and Justice 7m abstracto. Instead of 
the Christian doctrine, “Suffer injustice,’ the modern 
un-Christian or perhaps anti-Christian civilization teaches: 
“Do not suffer injustice; resent it; and if any one smites 
you upon your right cheek, do not turn to him your left 
cheek, but strike back, have him properly punished, and 
help thereby to maintain the virtues of justice and manhood 
in the world.” Such are the un-Christian ideas permeating 
the politics of all Christendom, and the codes of all modern 
states; and in no state of the Union, nor anywhere else, is 
there a law-book which is characterized by Christian ‘‘love,” 
and which therefore could be designated Christian. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 267 


A “Christian state” means not only a state whose insti- 
tutions and laws are permeated by the spirit of Christian 
ethics, but it means a state wherein the Christian church or a 
branch of it is acknowledged as the ruling state church. 
Thus the papal states and the kingdom of Naples were 
“Christian states” as long as they existed, because they 
recognized only one branch of the Christian religion and the 
Christian church, viz., the Roman Catholic church, and 
Jews, Protestants, etc., could live there by sufferance only. 
Thus Mecklenburg and Norway until a few years ago were 
Christian states, because their constitutions declared the 
Protestant religion as the state religion, and non-Protestants 
were denied equal rights with Protestants. Thus Maryland 
forty or fifty years ago was still a Christian state, because 
the constitution then in force contained the clause that only 
believers in the Trinity were eligible to state offices. Thus 
North Carolina was not long since still a Christian state, 
because her constitution insisted that state offices could be 
filled only by confessors of the Christian religion. Thus 
England was a Christian state before she emancipated the 
Catholics in 1829 and opened the gates of Parliament to 
the Jews in 1858; and of her it may even today be said 
that she is a Christian state, because there is an estab- 
lished state church there to the support of which Jews, 
dissenters, and Catholics are forced to pay their contribu- 
tions, and because, if I am not mistaken, some high clerical 
dignitaries of the state church are ex officio members of the 
upper house of Parliament. 

But happily our Union, and the states in our Union, have 
now all refuted the obsolete Christian-state idea. They 
have broken the chains which the Christian state riveted. 
God be praised that church and state are separated in our 
country! God be praised that the constitution of the United 


268 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


States and of the single states are now all freed from this 
danger-breeding idea! God be praised, that they are 
‘“‘atheistical,’’ as they have been accused of being by some 
over-zealous, dark warriors who desire to overcome the nine- 
teenth century and to restore again the fourteenth century! 
God be praised that this has been accomplished in our Union; 
and may our constitutions and state institutions remain 
‘“‘atheistical”? just as our manufactories, our banks, and 


our commerce are. 
—The Bible in the Schools. 1875. 


We live, God be praised, in the freest land in the world, 
in the United States of America, where church and state 
are entirely separated, and where everyone can follow the 
dictates of his own conscience and the precepts of his own 
religion, so long as he does not thereby infringe upon the 
rights and privileges of his neighbor. Let now the Jew who 
desires to keep the Sabbath in his own way have the undis- 
turbed right to keep it when and how he wishes. And let 
no unholy or sacrilegious hand attempt to attack the sanctu- 
ary of American freedom. May the dark day never come 
on which it shall be decreed by any legislative or executive 
power in America that one certain day for keeping the Sab- 
bath and one certain manner of keeping it be forced upon 
unwilling minorities. The Sabbath is a grand and sacred 
institution—we all agree to that. But its celebration must 
be left to the individual; this belongs to the category of his 
eternal and inalienable rights. American liberty, I venture 
to say, is a still grander and a still holier institution, and the 
maintenance of it is entrusted to each and every American 
citizen. We praise the weekly Sabbath, we are sure that 
from it immense blessings will spring forth—blessings for 
the mental and for the moral life of individuals, of families, 


SELECTED WRITINGS 269 


and of society at large. But what the laws and statutes 
enacted or to be enacted by the legislative authorities of 
our American states can do for the Sabbath is this and only 
this: —They can protect and ought to protect every congre- 
gation asembled on their Sabbath for divine worship—in a 
church or a chapel or a synagogue or a mosque or any other 
place—against being disturbed in their worship; and 
they can guarantee and ought to guarantee to each person 
in our land, even the poorest laborer, one day of perfect 
rest in each week of seven consecutive days. All further 
Sabbath legislation by the states or the United States is 
unnecessary and would be un-American. But let us, let 
all the friends of the great and sacred Sabbath institution 
trust in the power of public opinion. Relying upon this great 
power and upon the divine blessings of our Heavenly Father, 
we can look hopefully towards the future, and can rest 
assured that the land at all times will have a Sabbath, a 


genuine Sabbath. 
—The Sabbath in Judaism. 1803. 


But shall we then do nothing to clear a path in the world 
for the principles of Judaism? Shall we send out no mis- 
sionaries for this purpose? We have neither the right nor 
the desire to keep the truth for ourselves alone. Yes, we 
have our missionaries. The chief missionary on whom we 
rely is the sublimity, the innate power, of our religious teach- 
ings. The sun of itself breaks through the clouds and dis- 
solves the mists, no matter how thickly they cover its path. 
And Judaism will make a path for itself, spite of every giant 
obstacle which stands in its way. It has already conquered 
a great part of the civilized world and it will continue to 
make conquests among humanity. Philosophy and science 
are on the side of Judaism, missionaries of exceeding impor- 


270 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


tance, working for the destruction of heathenism and the 
establishment and dissemination of our teachings. The 
printing-press, the telegraph-wire, everything which con- 
tributes to the banishment of ignorance and the spread of 
knowledge serves the cause of Judaism. Lessing’s Nathan 
was a missionary for us. So was David Strauss, Ernst 
Renan, William C. Channing, Theodore Parker. So were 
Alexander von Humboldt and John Herschel. So are unpre- 
judiced teachers of law and history in every institution of 
learning. So are all those who labor successfully to under- 
mine the foundations of superstition and heathenism, of 
darkness and wickedness. ... The triumph of Judaism 
consists in the ever-widening dominion of its ethical teach- 
ings and its very few basic religious doctrines—doctrines 
which are never in the slightest degree inconsistent with 
logic nor the established facts of science. Let us rejoice that 
the victory is ever more clearly apparent. Jewish ideas 
govern the civilized world. 
—Krittk des christlichen Missionswesens. 1869. 


ON ETHICS AND RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY 
OF LIFE, ETC. 

MAN is weak, and he follows all too frequently the 
impulses of his heart; he listens all too frequently to the voice 
of his sensual nature, his lower impulses. But man is also 
strong, and able to subdue his sinful desires, his sinful will. 
His feet rest on the ground; his head is free in air. It is for 
you to decide which of your two natures shall prevail. No 
‘‘foreordination”’ from above condemns you to an unworthy 
life, and no divine “‘grace’”’? empowers you to lead a pure 
life. For your strength or weakness of body, your illness 
or health, your wealth or poverty, you are not in most cases 


SELECTED WRITINGS yw 


responsible. These are the result of an order of things which 
you can alter very little if at all; they are circumstances 
determined from on high. But your honesty or dishonesty, 
your good or bad character, depend solely upon yourself. 
In the sphere of the moral life man is free; necessity does 
not constrain him. This doctrine of the freedom of the will 
and the capacity of man to master his sinful impulses has 
been proclaimed at all times throughout the history of Juda- 
ism. “If thou doest not well, sin coucheth at the door; and 
unto thee is its desire, but thou mayest rule over it,” we 
read at the very beginning of the Holy Scriptures (Gen. 4:7). 
“T have set before thee life and death; choose life,” said 
Moses to his people (Deut. 30:19). ‘‘Freedom is given to 
man,” teaches the Mishnah (Aboth, 3, 19). ‘‘Everything 
is determined by God save the fear of God,” are the words 
of a well-known sentence in the Gemara (Megillah, 25 a). 
Such is the teaching of the rabbis in every century of our 
PASEO. wee, 

It is conceded that our moral life is determined in part 
by physical laws; that food, climate, and the like act upon 
body and mind and through these influence our behavior; 
that training and environment and our position in life play 
considerable part in the formation of our ideas, and that our 
ideas again affect our conduct in no uncertain way. And 
yet, difficult though it may be to draw the line between 
freedom and necessity, it remains nevertheless true that 
beyond the line there is a sphere of action which is absolutely 
free. It is a similar and an equally difficult problem to 
determine where the boundary lies between physical and 
mental life. The nervous system forms the point of con- 
tact; yet the two may be said to merge into one another. 
Notwithstanding this fact, no one will deny that there is a 
world of ideas, a life of the spirit, which is entirely dis- 


272 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


tinct from the life of the body. For this reason we believe 
firmly in the doctrine of free will, and we rejoice to think 
that this doctrine, this cornerstone of all morality, has been 
one of Israel’s teachings from the very beginning—even at 
that time when, in Hellas, Prometheus, chained to the rock, 
was shaking his fist defiantly in the face of Heaven, and hurl- 
ing angry words at Zeus: ‘Thou too standest under the law, 
art obedient to the god of necessity, who is thy god and 
mine.”’ Let us pay reverence to our Judaism, which thus 
strengthens in us the consciousness of human worth and the 
foundations of our moral life; let us rejoice that this bright 
jewel in our religion has maintained its purity spite of the 
‘iron destiny” of the old heathenism and the “blind neces- 
sity’’ of the new; spite of the “‘divine grace”’ taught by the 
reigning religion of the West, and the “fatalism” incul- 
cated by the prevailing religion of the East. 
—Sitiliche und religiose Lebenserneuerung. 1864. 


In those days [the 1850’s] materialism began to raise its 
head and thought to take the world by storm. From philo- 
sophical materialism which denied the existence of God and 
the soul and recognized matter alone, and which undertook 
to solve all world-problems on the basis of this conception 
of the universe, the descent soon began to vulgar material- 
ism, and every ideal, every noble aspiration, every act of 
altruism was dragged without distinction through the dust 
and slime of a mean physical existence. Now it may be 
entirely possible to unite philosophical materialism in prac- 
tice with a noble life, with the most idealistic thoughts, yes, 
even with unselfishness so complete that it amounts to self- 
sacrifice. But vulgar materialism? An enemy of human- 
ity, an evil demon out of the depths, against which we must 
battle with all our strength! 

—Rede tm Sinat Tempel. 1886. 


SELECTED WRITINGS oMyihe 


It is true that no healthy social order can be created, no 
enduring social and political structure can be erected, with 
the aid of idealism alone, one-sided and exaggerated idealism. 
For idealistic aspirations need always to be accompanied 
by careful consideration of actual conditions. But alas for 
the people among whom idealism is undervalued, or from 
whose midst it has entirely vanished! Alas for the age in 
which this occurs! Impractical dreamers, as you call them, 
men who think only high and unworldly thoughts, may not 
achieve the same material success as others who are more 
practical-minded. Nevertheless, they are the light of the 
world; they shine by their own light, the reflection of which 
falls upon wide circles, transfiguring and ennobling. O, how 
dreary and sad the world would appear were it not for the 
eS —Liebmann Adler. 1892. 

Religion is the struggle to rise above the finite, the yearn- 
ing toward what is higher and mightier. As such, it is 
inborn in the human heart, a necessity of the soul-life; hence 
religion will never never vanish from among mankind. 

—Jiidische Zeit- und Streitfragen. 1878. 


Nothing on earth is so firmly fixed as not to be subject 
to the processes of historical development, and so it is with 
the treasures of religious thought. And if you say: Reli- 
gious doctrine remains forever the same, religion stands still 
forever, the opposite opinion is culpable heresy—you will hear 
the answer resounding from every side, And still it moves. 

—Kol Kore Bamidbar. 18509. 


A religious law which is not rooted either in the spiritual 
or the physical nature of man is binding only so long as it 
continues to exert a sanctifying influence on head and heart, 


on character and conduct. _ Kol Kore Bamidbar. 1850. 


274 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Men speak of the fanaticism of so-called “believers’’; 
of the dogmatism of the religious. But there is also a fanati- 
cism of atheism, a dogmatism of unfaith, and these are as a 
rule to be found where ignorance and thoughtlessness and 
stupidity hold sway. The sincere and thorough seeker after 
truth ismodest. Hesays: There are limits to our knowledge; 
what lies beyond we do not and cannot know. 

—Unter welchen Bedingungen sind die Pforten unserer Gottes- 
hiuser Pforten der Gerechtigkett? 1876. 


Among the laws of the Torah there are many which, as 
regards intrinsic value and comprehensiveness, stand far 
above the decalogue, as for example, the injunction, Ye 
shall be holy; or, Love thy neighbor as thyself. 

—Was ist Judenthum? 1887. 


Results of lasting value are not accomplished by the 
noisy and violent overthrow of things. Only those move- 
ments which are deeply rooted in history, and which pene- 
trate slowly, quietly, steadily, deep into human life are of 
permanent historic significance. 

—Abraham Geiger. 1874. 


Only the tree which sinks its roots deep in the soil of 
history will produce vigorous branches and splendid blos- 
soms and give promise for the future. 

—Unter welchen Bedingungen sind die Pforten unserer Gottes- 
haiuser Pforten der Gerechtigkeit? 1876. 


We are gloriously endowed by our Maker, but these 
endowments are not only glorious ones, but also responsible 
ones. We have great faculties, but we must develop and 
guide and impel them. We have passions and inclinations, 
but we must watch and control them. We observe currents 
of thought within our minds, but we must sometimes stay 


SELECTED WRITINGS 276 


them, or. change them. We have an intellect, but we must 
often concentrate it on objects which we wish to compre- 
hend. We can fix our eyes on the summits of perfection, 
but we must also try to climb up towards them. 

—On Self-Improvement. 1880. 


Seek intercourse with superior minds, and learn from 
them. Here is a source for enjoyment and happiness which 
none should neglect. In enjoying the daily companionship 
of noble and superior minds, we widen not only the horizon 
of our intellect, we expand also our hearts and ennoble them, 
and we purify our inclinations and passions and direct 
them toward good aims. 

Now don’t interrupt me by saying that it is impos- 
sible to have daily such excellent company. Do not say 
that many live retired and isolated, and must forego such 
pleasures. You can have them, every one of you, if you 
only wish them. In their books great men talk to you. Do 
you desire the company of Shakespeare? ‘Take then the 
volumes yonder, and he will open unto you worlds of imagi- 
nation and the workings of the human heart. Would you 
spend an hour with Franklin? ‘There on that shelf you will 
find a book of his that will enrich you in his practical wis- 
dom. Or would you soar into higher regions with Goethe 
and Schiller? Why, they will come unto you, even into 
your modest dwellings, and will open unto you the golden 
gates of poetry, and will carry you high up to regions of true 


bliss and unalloyed enjoyment. 
—On Self-Improvement. 1880. 


Friends, I venture to remind you of an old sentence in 
the Talmud, which says: JD "M81 TAN DIN Wad aby 
rian. “First learn something positive, and afterwards 
speculate.”’ And furthermore, I would call your attention 


276 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


to the words of Rabbi Eliezer: 7730N 772 OS") Wa. “Keep 
the boys away from philosophizing!”’ This I would do, and 
this I might add: Learn, my friends, for in order to build 
one must have, first, building materials; second, these mate- 
rials must be good and well tried, able to withstand hail and 
rain and heat; third, they must be used in their proper place 
and in the right manner and in good connection with the other 
parts of the wall into which they are to be put. If you, 
from your nebulous height scorn to learn this lesson and to 
heed it, all your building will be but air-castles without foun- 
dation and all your philosophical constructions and theolog- 
ical speculations will be—well, what? Swindle! An airy 
nothing! ’Halomoth! Learn first, my friends! 
—Interary Miscellanies. 1887. 


It is one of the great mistakes of our age to exalt talent 
and learning above virtue and character, and to place intel- 
lectual culture above moral culture. It is more than a mis- 
take, it is a crime, to sacrifice moral culture to intellectual 
culture; to regard education only as a stimulus to learning; 
to worship talent, and a brilliant mind, and a gift of witty 
conversation, above rectitude, honesty, truthfulness, sym- 


pathy with our fellow-men. 
—On Self-Improvement. 1880. 


Blessed is the family in whose midst dwells an honored 
grandfather, or a grandmother rich in years! Blessed is the 
city and the country where many worthy old people reside! 
They produce, even if they are entirely inactive, merely by 
virtue of their presence, wealth of the greatest value. They 
produce sentiments of piety, of reverence, of respect, of love, 
in the hearts of the younger members of the family; they 
produce the same sentiments in the community in which 
they spend their days. Where they dwell, rude behavior 


SELECTED WRITINGS 277 


and vulgar thinking are banished; thought and conduct 


are ennobled and purified. 
—Inebmann Adler. 1892. 


In all human activity progress is gradual; slowly, though 
steadily, we advance from an imperfect good to a less imper- 
fect better. For this reason thinking men will not oppose a 
good measure because it is not the best it is possible to con- 


celve. c 
—Sittenlehre in der Volksschule. 1881. 


The closer a person is to us, in time, in space, in blood 
relationship, in profession, the greater our interest is in 
him. This is entirely natural, and psychologically easily 
to be explained. If, then, I do an act of practical charity 
first to a needy relative or a colleague or a fellow-member 
of an organization one should not immediately conclude 
that I am without sympathy for the sufferings of other 
men; and if I appeal in the interest of unfortunate brother- 
Jews to the more prosperous among our coreligionists it 
does not imply that the misery of others awakens no sym- 
pathy in my heart. Necessity demands that we select a 
small segment out of the great circle of universal humanity, 
all of whose evils we cannot cure, and direct our charitable 
efforts towards that. Should means be sufficient, so that we 
can benefit neighboring segments also, it then becomes our 
duty to labor for the good of those beyond the limits of our 
enosen field... . 

It is entirely proper therefore to refrain from supporting 
chimerical impossible projects; not to undertake, like Don 
Quixote, to fight and vanquish every evil in the world, and 
make all humanity happy. Such a view does not denote 
illiberality; it merely takes actual conditions wisely into 


account. : : 
—Correspondenz. Jewish Times. 1871. 


278 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Deep-seated and widespread sentimental aspirations fall 
more heavily into the scales of a people’s soul-life and give 
more powerful direction to a people’s movements and 
actions than thousands of coolly considered reasons of 
vulgar utility. 

—As to a Jewish State. 1890. 


Don’t you know that the “‘majority,”’ in whom so many 
would trust, is often wrong? that it is often in the service 
of untruth? that, if you acknowledge its authority, it 
tyrannizes the minority? There are large fields of human 
activity where of necessity the majority must rule. In such 
necessary things, as an old saying is, there must be unity. 
But—so the very same saying adds—in things not necessary 
let us have liberty, and in all things love! 

—Some Questions of the Day. 1890. 


The world is not governed by theories conceived and 
proved in the quiet of the study. One must take actual 
facts into account. 

—Review of “ Religidse Scheidewdnde.” 1881. 


God is our Father, is One, and necessarily mankind is 
One. . . . Love one another, you nations of the earth, and 
get rid of the notion that one people is destined to be the 
master, and another people is destined to be the servant. 
—The Doctrines of Judaism in Juxtaposition to Those of 
Christianity. 1866. 


As Israel is simply a part of mankind, so every nation 
is simply a part of mankind. Patriotism < Internationalism; 
Nationality < Humanity. 

—From a draft of a German sermon. 1884. 


SELECTED WRITINGS 279 


Let us never forget that the Old Testament and the New 
Testament, the Talmudic and the Patristic literature, etc., 
must be considered as historical documents—highly impor- 
tant as witnesses to the gradual development of religious and 
moral ideas, but nevertheless as documents which we would 
not see in their true light if we considered them as being 
in all their words and ideas the final blossom and the highest 
results of the mental and moral life of mankind. The Chris- 
tian of the nineteenth century and the Jew of the nineteenth 
century are mentally more enlightened and in certain respects 
morally higher advanced than the Christians and the Jews 
of the first and second and third century of the common era, 
and in many a point our ideas are truer and loftier and purer 
_ than the corresponding ones of the times of St. John and of 
Rabbi Akiba, of Tertullian and of Simon ben Yochai. 

—An Important Ethical Principle. 1808. 


O glorious golden messianic time! When we think of 
thee, our eyes shine with more radiant light, our breast 
expands more proudly. O mighty messianic trumpet call! 
According to Biblical legend the walls of Jericho fell miracu- 
lously at the sound of the trumpet; so, likewise, when the 
great messianic trumpet sounds on that distant day, walls 
and barriers will again be overthrown, those barriers which 
separate man from man and brother from brother. 

—Schofarklange. 1860. 


‘Ch 


<\ 


\ 


ano} i aN Veet re at on Met ert 


‘ 


ae ui a pee <% Muy i % ae ipa ; oa A Ny hy 
\. “) nes / AN 


Susy Ua uy hy My A ih ‘ , ai vines ve 


awe Svat 
Bt ey ban Asa iy a Aus, 
aie i bey vad iy 1 \ ear 
:, 2, an anh ee 
Sima! ee 








LENA GE 
ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 











ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Intropuctory Note.—This list falls short of completeness by the 
omission, first, of sermons in manuscript, these being for the most 
part festival sermons not intended for publication and not used in 
the pulpit; second, of one or two small pieces in manuscript form 
evidently written by B. F. for his own amusement, as, for instance, a 
poem, “Der Herbst,” signed ‘‘Laurentius Biedermeyer, der Jiingere,”’ 
which is a parody on a poem which had appeared in a weekly journal; 
third, of a very few printed articles which bear upon personal relations 
or deal with personal affairs and have no general historical interest; 
and, fourth (most regrettably), of several articles on Reform Judaism 
contributed to the Illinois Staatszeitung in 1859, of which no additional 
information has been obtainable. Doubtless, also, other articles have 
escaped the notice of the compiler. It is believed, however, that with 
the exception of the articles in the Staatszeitung, nothing of any con- 
siderable importance is lacking, and that the list affords a fairly 
adequate view of the opinions of Bernhard Felsenthal (so far as these 
were expressed by him in writing), as also of his interests and activities. 

The arrangement is strictly chronological according to date of 
publication, with one exception to which attention is called in the 
proper place. In the case of unpublished manuscripts of addresses, 
etc., the date used is that of delivery of the address, when known. 

Books, pamphlets, and reprints separately published are indicated 
by an asterisk (*) preceding the title. 


1855 


HEBREW LIBRARIES. Israelite, 1:309, April 6, 1855. 

On the study of Hebrew literature as an essential part of Jew- 
ish religious life, and on the difficulty of pursuing such study in 
America. Suggests that every congregation establish a Hebrew 
library. (1) 


On Know-Noruincism. Lawrenceburg (Ind.) Democratic 
Register, May 18(?), 1855. i 
2 


283 


284 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


ANOTHER REPLY TO THE QUESTION: “IS THE TALMUD 
ANTI-SOCIAL?” Israelite, 2:4-5, July 13, 1855. 

Follows an article on the subject by M. Mensor (Israelite, 

1:388-89). Brings evidence to prove that the spirit of the Tal- 

mud is ‘‘not the universal human, but the illiberal national 

spirit.”” The fundamental idea of the Talmud is, however, that 

of historical development, and it is this which has preserved 

Judaism. (3) 


1856 
RATHSEL. Deborah, 1:255, March 21, 1856. 


Riddle in verse, concerning one who is half Jew, half Christian. 


(4) 


On REFORMS IN THE SYNAGOGUE. Israelite, 3:141-42, 
November 7, 1856. 

Sets forth emphatically the need for reform of the synagogue 

service. Advocates revision of the prayers, the use of the ver- 

nacular, etc. (5) 


TEKUFOTH—AN OLD SUPERSTITION—ITS REASON—THE 
ASTROLOGY IN THE TALMUD. Israelite, 3:165, Novem- 

ber 28, 1856. 
Finds in Chaldaean astrology the origin of a certain old Jewish 
superstition connected with the beginning of the seasons. 6) 
6 


1857 


OFFENBARUNGSGLAUBEN UND REFORM. SIND BEIDE ZU 
VEREINBAREN? Sinai, 2:404-9, February, 1857. 

Grants the consistency of the Orthodox position on the basis 

of belief in the doctrine of revelation, and points out the need for 

as logical a foundation for Reform. ‘Reform has, for thousands 

of persons, all the force of subjective truth. Has it also been 

raised, by scientific reasoning, to the plane of objective truth ?” 

There is a passing reference to synods with denial of their author- 

ity. Discussion by the editor, David Einhorn, follows the 

article. (7) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 285 


REFORMBEWEGUNGEN IN DEN ISRAELITISCHEN GEMEINDEN 
AMERIKA’S. Deborah, 2: 237-38, 242-43, 253-54, March 
eee aL Oy. 

Unsigned. Describes a congregational meeting in Madison, 
Indiana, and gives the text in full of an address by “F” which 
advocated radical reforms in synagogue services; also reports 
with appreciation of its humorous aspects the lively discussion 
which followed. ‘The views of various members—A, B, C, X, 
Y, Z, etc.—are quoted, each representing a typical attitude of 
the Jews of the time. (8) 


Aus DEM WESTEN. Sinai, 2:624-26, August, 1857. 
Unsigned. On Jewish religious conditions in the West (written 
from Indiana), and on the essentially Reform character of all 
the ‘‘parties,’’ whatever they may call themselves. (9) 


1858 
UEBER DAS JUDISCH-RELIGIOSE LEBEN. VERMISCHTE 
BLATTER. Sinai, 3:1058-62 (I-II), 1093-96 (III-V), 
1130-32 (VI), 1154-57 (VII); 4:38-41 (VIII), 73-76 
(VIII-IX), 210-13 (X), October, 1858—August, 1850. 
I. Dre PARTEIEN. Presents a new classification of the Jewish 
“parties,” as follows: 


A. The religious B. The irreligious 

1. Reformers 1. Deformers 

2. Orthodox 2. Creatures of habit 
or, 
A. The educated (Wissende) B. The ignorant 

1. Reformers 1. Deformers 

2. Orthodox 2, Creatures of habit 


II. Das NEvE Gesetsucu. An enthusiastic review of Ein- 
horn’s prayer book, Olath Tamid. 
III. ALTER DES JUDENTHUMS. Quotes the sentence, “Juda- 


ism is as old as humanity,” adding the corollary, “In its essence, 
pure Judaism is identical with pure humanity.’’ Shows the 


286 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


bearing this has on our understanding of the Bible and of post- 
Biblical Jewish literature, and on the relation of this literature 
to the Judaism of the present. ‘Touches on the changeable char- 
acter of Jewish dogma, the authority of the Mosaic Law, the 
Talmudic Law, etc. 


IV. DAs JUDENTHUM UND DER TALMuD. Calls attention to 
the fact that the Talmud in many places broke the letter of the 
Biblical law, and declares that the reformers of the present have 
an equal right to attempt further regeneration of the Jewish cere- 
monial life. It is vitally important, however, to maintain his- 
torical continuity, and for this a thorough understanding of the 
Talmud is necessary. ‘‘ We recognize in the Talmud an historic 
phenomenon which at the same time concluded one period and 
became the foundation for another, a phenomenon which we 
must endeavor to understand fully and clearly if we wish to keep 
the ground under our feet and rebuild the synagogue on its proper 
foundations.” 


V. TALMUDISCHE EXPOSITIONEN DER BIBLISCHEN GESETZE. 
Opposes the view that Biblical laws must be practiced according 
to Talmudic interpretation. 


VI. BIBEL UND WISSENSCHAFT. ‘The Bible is not to be con- 
sidered a source-book in science or history, but its deep religious 
significance is not affected by the fact that it is not literally true. 
‘We distinguish between the letter and the spirit. We discern 
throughout the holy Scriptures a profoundly religious and ethical 
spirit, and this it is which is eternal and divine.” 


VII. BrseLtkritik. Shows that the contradictions in the 
Bible, pointed out by Biblical criticism, render the supernatural 
theory of its origin untenable. 


VIII. BrstiscHe GeEseTzE. Maintains that many of the 
Mosaic laws have become obsolete by the passage of time, and 
offers as a test of validity the principle that only such laws are 
binding which have their source in the physical or spiritual 
nature of man, or which have power to influence men religiously. 


IX. BisiiscHE DocmaTiK. Shows that dogmas are not fixed 


and absolute in the Bible, and it is unreasonable, therefore, to 
rest modern beliefs on Biblical authority. 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 287 


X. RELIGION UND GESETz. Asserts that acts performed solely 
in obedience to external laws are not truly religious. Emphasis 
should be placed not on ceremonies but on sincerity of feeling 
and purity of life. (10) 


1859 


*KoL Kore BAMIDBAR. UEBER JUDISCHE REFORM. EIN 
WoRT AN DIE FREUNDE DERSELBEN. Chicago: Charles 
Hess, 1859. 39pp. 8vo. Appendix, pp. 33-39. Re- 
printed in No. 277, “The Beginnings of the Chicago 
Sinai Congregation.” 

A call to those favoring the Jewish Reform movement to 
organize a Reform congregation. The Orthodox and Reform 
standpoints are differentiated, the principles which should guide 
Reform congregations are stated in the form of theses, and their 
application in such matters as ritual, festival observance, and 
religious education, is discussed. The Appendix gives correspond- 
ence between Samuel Adler and a committee of the Jiidischer Re- 
formverein concerning the advisability of establishing a Reform 
congregation in Chicago, the selection of a prayer book, etc. 

Reviewed by Einhorn in Sinai, 4: 111-20, May, 1859. Gx) 

II 


SKIZZE EINES VoRTRAGS. Ms. 1859. 7 pp. 


An address delivered before the Jiidischer Reformverein. A 
plea for Reform. (12) 


[Diz GRUNDIDEEN DER REFORMBEWEGUNG.| Sinai, 4:153- 
54, June, 1859. First appeared in Illinois Staatszettung. 
Abstract of an address held at a public meeting of the Jiidischer 
Reformverein, Chicago, April 17, 1859. Describes the religious 
conditions of the time, and sets forth the great need for reform. 
(13) 
EINE LITERATURGESCHICHTLICHE BEMERKUNG. Svat, 
4:248, September, 18509. 
Brief comment on citations contained in Steinschneider’s 
Hebraeische Bibliographie, 1859, referring to the magnet in 
Jewish literature. (14) 


288 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


1860 


*SCHOFARKLANGE. Chicago: n.p., 1860. 21 pp. 16mo. 
A sermon delivered on Rosh ha-Shanah, 5621, before Kehillath 
Anshe Maarabh. 
Reviewed in Sinai, 5:305-7. (15) 


1861 


Nur HINAUF. In Hymnen, gesammelt und herausgegeben 
auf Kosten der Sinaigemeinde in Chicago (Chicago, 
1861), Dp. 27. 

Unsigned. One of a collection of thirty-four German hymns 
by various authors. (16) 


Muss MAN SICH BEIM BETEN NACH OSTEN WENDEN? 
(Ern Votum.) Sinai, 6:110-11, May, 1861. 

The question had arisen in reference to the synagogue of Sinai 

Congregation, Chicago. The opinion here given is that it is not 

necessary to observe the custom. (17) 


1862 


UEBER DIE BEHANDLUNG VON STERBENDEN UND TODTEN, 
SOWIE UBER TRAUERGEBRAUCHE. Ms. 1862. 9 pp. 
Written at the request of Mr. Julius Rosenthal, Chicago, and 
addressed to him in the form of a letter. Suggests definite 
reforms in custom, these to be embodied in the Revised Constitu- 

tion of the Hebrew Benevolent Society. Many of the prevailing 
practices are condemned as superstitious. The subject is treated 
both historically and practically. (18) 


Die JUDEN UND DIE SCLAVEREI. § Tllinois Staatszeitung, June 
6, 1862. Same in Sinai, 7:158-63, July, 1862. 

Asserts that the great majority of Jews in America are anti- 
slavery in opinion, and explains the causes for the views held by 
the minority. 

Noted in M. J. Kohler, ‘‘ Jews and the American anti-Slavery 
Movement,” Part Il. American Jewish Historical Society. Publi- 
cations, 1901, No. 9, p. 52. (19) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 289 


LEGISLATORISCHE BARBAREI. NEGERRECHT UND ‘“‘ JUDEN- 
RECHT.” Illinois Staatszeitung, July 9, 1862. 

An article occasioned by bills passed in the Senate declaring 
Negroes incompetent to act as witnesses in the District of Colum- 
bia. Similar restrictions in the case of Jews are traced from 
Justinian to the present time, and examples are cited of existing 
statutes in several of the German states. ‘‘What can justify 
such barbarism? Russia does not lie only between Kalisz and 
Kamchatka, but is also on the shores of the Potomac and Lake 

- Michigan.” (20) 


SENATOR WILSON VON MASSACHUSETTS UND DAS FELDPRE- 
DIGERGESETZ. Illinois Staatszeitung, July 12, 1862. 
Same in Simat, 7:200-201, August, 1862. 

Refers to the amendment of the law regarding field chaplains, 
by which the word “religious’’ was substituted for ‘‘Christian”’ 
in the phrase “regularly ordained ministers of some Christian 
denomination.” Senator Wilson had introduced the amendment 
at the request of B. F. (21) 


1863 


*7UR ERINNERUNG AN FRAU CAROLINE FELSENTHAL. Chi- 
cago: Illinois Staatszeitung, 1863. 8 pp. 8vo. 

Privately printed for the members of the Young Ladies’ 

Hebrew Benevolent Society, Chicago. Cf. p. 32, this yolume. 

(22) 

*7UR ERINNERUNG AN FRAU SARAH GREENSFELDER. Chi- 
cago: Illinois Staatszeitung, 1863. 4 pp. 8vo. 

A funeral address. Expresses belief in the indestructibility 

of the spiritual element in man. (23) 


1864 


*ZWEI REDEN. Chicago: M. Hofmann, 1864. 3opp. 8vo. 
Contents: UNSERE FREUDE BEI DER T’'EMPELWEIHE, pp. 
5-20; SITTLICHE UND RELIGIOSE LEBENSERNEUERUNG, 
pp. 21-30. The first of the two sermons reprinted in 

translation in this volume, with title, ‘‘Wherefore We 


290 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Rejoice.’’ Same, condensed, in Chicago Telegraph, Octo- 
ber 2, 1864, with title, REDE BEI DER EINWEIHUNG DES 
TEMPELS DER ZIONGEMEINDE. 

Two sermons delivered on Rosh ha-Shanah, 5625, before Zion 
Congregation. ‘‘Unsere Freude bei der Tempelweihe” was 
delivered at the first service of the newly founded congregation, 
and the one at which B. F. first officiated as its rabbi. He makes 
clear his own religious standpoint, summarizes the leading ideas 
of Jewish Reform, and pleads for the subordination of the mate- 
rialistic to the higher aspects of life. ‘“‘Sittliche und religidse 
Lebenserneuerung”’ deals, first, with the moral life of man, 
laying emphasis on the freedom of the will; second, with the 
duty to cast aside outworn religious conceptions and ceremonies, 
and to cling with increased devotion to the great fundamental 
truths and the glorious /iving institutions of Judaism. The 
Sabbath and festivals are held to be particularly vital to the future 
of Judaism. (24) 


Diz EINWEIHUNG DES NEUEN GOTTESHAUSES B’NAI SHOLOM. 
Chicago Telegraph, September —, 1864. 

Abstract of sermon. A comparison of Orthodox and Reform 

Judaism. “Let our Judaism in the future be wholly Jewish. 

Let us cast out its extraneous elements. We shall not therefore 

regard with disdain the Judaism of the past, any more than would 

a daughter her mother, if she appeared in old-fashioned gar- 

ments.” (25) 


1865 


DriE ERMORDUNG DES PRASIDENTEN. Illinois Staatszeitung, 
April 25, 186s. 

Address delivered in Zion Temple, Chicago, on April 19, at 
the hour when President Lincoln’s remains were removed from 
the White House to the Capitol. Lincoln is described as one 
in whose private and in whose public life justice and love, firm- 
ness and kindness, were splendidly combined. (26) 


GEDANKEN UBER JUDISCHE JOURNALISTIK. Progress, Octo- 
ber 27—November 10, 1865. 

Discusses the kind of subject matter with which Jewish jour- 

nals may properly deal, the faults of Jewish journalism in Amer- 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 291 


ica, the proper attitude toward Christianity, etc. Incidentally 
a tribute is paid to the Puritans and their contribution to de- 
mocracy. ‘There is a passage on “humbuggery.”’ (27) 


1866 


*]JUDISCHES SCHULWESEN IN AMERIKA. Chicago: A. Heun- 
isch, 1866. 40 pp. 16mo. 

An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, December 13, 
1865. Sets forth the urgent need for systematic Jewish religious 
education. As a remedy for the serious situation which condi- 
tions had brought about for American Judaism, it is proposed 
that schools be established in all cities, in which Hebrew studies 
should be a part of the curriculum. Outlines a course of study 
and discusses the pedagogy of Jewish subjects. Special emphasis 
is laid on the need for higher rather than for elementary schools. 
The final section discusses rabbinical training and advocates 
the sending of young men to Europe rather than attempting to 
educate them in America, there being as yet no proper foundation 
in this country for a theological seminary. Germany still 
remains at the date of writing the fountainhead of Jewish learn- 
ing and Jewish thought. (28) 


THE DOCTRINES OF JUDAISM IN JUXTAPOSITION TO ‘THOSE 
OF CHRISTIANITY. Chicago Republican, January 8, 
1866. 

A sermon delivered in Zion Temple, January 6. ‘The doctrines 
are examined according to the criterion of reason, and the moral 
implications of pure monotheism are set forth. (29) 


Diez JUDISCHE UNIVERSITAT NOCH EINMAL. Hebrew Leader, 
August —, 1866. 

Signed “Gebar Jehudai.”” Emphatically opposes the establish- 
ment of a Jewish university, asserting that “‘the holiest interests 
of American Judaism would thereby be betrayed.” Jewish 
students should be sent to Germany for theological training. 
The lack of Jewish knowledge among the general mass of Ameri- 
can Jews is to be overcome by schools for systematic Jewish 
education in all the larger cities. (30) 


292 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


1867 


UEBER DEN URSPRUNG DES JUDENTHUMS UND DIE EPOCHEN 
DESSELBEN. Chicago Sonntags-Zeitung. Extra-Beilage, 
January 27, 1867. 2 pp. (Reprinted in translation 
in this volume, with title, ‘‘The Origin of Judaism and 
Its Three Epochs.’’) 

An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, January 16, 1867. 
The three great epochs of Judaism—Mosaic, Talmudic, and 
Modern—are discussed as to origin, development, characteristic 
features, and governing ideas, with critical glances at the work 
of various historians and interpreters of history, such as Renan, 
Strauss, Geiger, and Graetz. ‘The portion of the paper devoted 
to the Mosaic period is chiefly given over to the discussion of the 
origin of the monotheistic idea. The spiritual discovery of mono- 
theism is compared from the psychological standpoint with the 
scientific discoveries of Newton and Archimedes. (31) 


EXCLUSIV JUDISCHE BEGRABNISSPLATZE ODER NICHT? 
Hebrew Leader, May to, 1867. 

The question having arisen in connection with the proposed 
purchase by Sinai and Zion Congregations, Chicago, of burial 
ground in a non-sectarian cemetery, B. F., as rabbi, advised that 
the purchase be made; while Talmudic opinion was chiefly 
against the burial of Jews with non-Jews, such pronouncements 
need not be binding upon us; the custom of maintaining separate 
cemeteries was partly the result of conditions in mediaeval times 
which no longer exist; and finally, the question of place of burial 
is not to be considered a religious one. ‘“‘ Religion is for the living 
and not for the dead.”’ Closes with comment on the importance 
placed upon Jewish burial by many who show nothing but indif- 
ference and neglect toward Judaism in more vital matters. Ga 


Minority Report. In Joint Report of Representatives of 
Lodges of Independent Order B’nat B’rith in Illinois at 
Annual Session of District Grand Lodge No. 2, Mul- 
waukee, July 14-17, 1867 (Chicago, 1867), pp. 19-29. 

Discusses the ‘‘Jewish University,” regalia, organization of a new 
District Grand Lodge, and other controversial matters. The re- 
port had been denied publication by D.G.L. No. 2. (33) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 203 


LETTERS FROM A JEWISH RABBI [ON MODERN JUDAISM AND 
Its PECULIARITIES]. Christian Freeman, July 18, 1867. 

The first, and apparently the only letter published, of what 

was intended to be a series. Contains a rapid survey of Jewish 
history in post-Biblical times to the death of Herod, preceded 

by remarks on the prevalence of false ideas concerning Jews and 
Judaism. “Judaism is as Christianism, as Mohammedanism, 

as Hinduism, an historical phenomenon, and only an historical 
method of looking at such religious systems will lead us to a true 

and full knowledge of the same.” (34) 


GEDENKREDE AUF Dr. Moritz Maver. Hebrew Leader, 
September 13(?)—20, 1867. 

A eulogy. Moritz Mayer was rabbi at Charleston, S.C., 

1852-61, and was active in the Reform movement. (35) 


BELEUCHTUNG DER VON DR. JASTROW AUFGESTELLTEN 
PLATFORM. Hebrew Leader, November 8-15, 1867. 


WEITERES UBER DIE PLATFORM. Hebrew Leader, Decem- 
Dernie-27 51907) January 3; 1868: 


SCHLUSSWORT UBER DIE PLATFORM. Hebrew Leader, Jan- 
uary I0, 1868. | 
All the articles except the final one of January ro are signed 
“Bikatha Dekephaja.” Authorship is acknowledged in the 
issue of December 20, and it is explained that ‘‘ Bikatha Deke- 
phaja”’ is the Chaldaeized form of the author’s real name. The 
series constitutes a critical examination of the “platform” of Rabbi 
Marcus Jastrow. Answers by the editor are in issues of Novem- 
ber 15, 22, and 29, under the heading, “‘ An den verehrten Bikatha 
Dekephaja,” and also in footnotes and at the end of articles. 
See also “‘Einige Bemerkungen auf Herrn Bikatha Dekephaja’s 
Beleuchtung meiner Platform,” by M. Jastrow, in Hebrew Leader, 
following conclusion of series. (36) 


1868 


*CONFIRMANDEN-UNTERRICHT. [Chicago]: Max Stern, 
130—(?) 18 pp. 16mo. 

Unsigned. Brief catechism intended for the confirmation 

service. (37) 


204 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


DENKSCHRIFT, DER GENERAL CONVENTION DES U.O.B.B. 
UNTERBREITET. Ms. 1868. 16 pp. | 

Memorial presented to the General Convention of I.0.B.B., 

July, 1868, by the three Chicago lodges. Urges adoption of a 

new constitution, etc. (38) 


*A PRACTICAL GRAMMAR OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE. 
New York: L. H. Frank, 1868. 99pp. 8vo. 

Reviewed in Occident, 26:g0-91, May, 1868, and by E. M. F. 

in Hebrew Leader (reprinted in Living Age, 98:269-71, August 1, 

1868). (39) 


A VALUABLE LIBRARY TO BE SOLD. WNation, 6:492, June 
18, 1868. 

A letter calling attention to the approaching sale in Amster- 
dam of an extremely valuable collection of Hebraica and Judaica, 
made up of the libraries of Guiseppe Almanzi, Jacob Emden, and 
Chief Rabbi M. J. Lewenstein of Paramaribo. B. F. suggests 
that the collection be secured for America. It was purchased 
the same year by Temple Emanu-El, New York, and later, in 
1892, presented to Columbia College. Cf. No. 261. (40) 


NP WON Dans Ha-Mageid, »12°105-00, 9204; meee 
June 24, 1868—January 18, 1860. 

Letters from America, describing conditions of freedom and 
prosperity in the United States, and suggesting that those who 
suffer in Moldavia and elsewhere under persecution and poverty 
emigrate to this country. Only those should come, however, 
who can adapt themselves to the conditions of American life, and 
immigrants should not remain in the large cities, but should take 
up agriculture in the western states. The Jewish Reform move- 
ment in America is touched upon, and the service in the Reform 
synagogue is described. (41) 


[REDE.] Hebrew Leader, 12, no. 17:2-3, July 31, 1868. 
Address delivered before the first General Convention of 
1.0.B.B., New York, July 23, 1868. An earnest defense of the 
existence of the order, on the ground that it is an institution of 
great educational value for which an influential future may 
be expected. (42) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 295 


DER ORDEN DER B’NE B’ritH. Illinois Staatszeitung, 
August 8, 1868. 

An account of the General Convention held in New York, July 

19-27, 1868, preceded by a brief history of the order, and a 

statement of its philanthropic and educational purposes. The 

reforms instituted by the Convention are described, B. F. express- 

ing gratification over the abandonment of such outworn features 

as secrecy of meetings and wearing of regalia. Changes in 

organization and other acts of the Convention are also considered 

to be in the direction of improvement. (43) 


1869 


*KRITIK DES CHRISTLICHEN MISSIONSWESENS, INSBESON- 
DERE DER “‘JUDENMISSION.” Chicago: Ed. Buhler, 
TOOOsmE2 On DDemeo VO; 

An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, January 20, 1869. 
Occasioned by the establishment in Chicago of the Western 
Hebrew Christian Brotherhood, a society for the conversion of 
the Jews. Discusses aims, methods, and results of missions in 
general, and of missions to Jews in particular, and denounces 
them as insulting and as dangerous to the peace of society. 
Incidentally the principles of Judaism and of orthodox Chris- 
tianity are contrasted, and the complete absence of any effort 
on the part of Jews to make proselytes for Judaism is justified 
on religious and on specifically Jewish grounds. 

Reviewed in Jewish Times, 1, no. 1:10, and in Chicago Repub- 
lican, February 28, 1869. (44) 


“THE JEWISH CHRISTIAN MiIssION.” Chicago Evening 
Journal, January 26, 1860. 
Answers a communication which had appeared in the issue of 
January 23 over the signatures of the Executive Committee of the 
Western Hebrew Christian Brotherhood. (45) 


CONVERSIONS TO JuDAISM. Chicago Tribune, February 17, 
1860. 

A correction of an article in the issue of February 15. Gives 

the general facts as to the frequency of conversion and the 


296 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


absence of “articles of faith’? in Judaism. Also explains the 
attitude of Jews toward conversion. (46) 


CONVERSION OF JEWS. Chicago Tribune, March 11, 1869. 
Same in Jewish Times, 1, no. 3:6-7, March 10, 1869. 

A letter to the editor, contradicting the statement made in a 
sermon by the secretary of the Western Hebrew Christian 
Brotherhood that ‘“‘twenty thousand Jews in Europe join in 
worshipping the great King [Jesus].’’ Calls attention to other 
‘“‘deviations from the truth” on the part of the conversion society, 
and asserts that its real aim is to benefit its treasury. (47) 


EXTRACT FROM A LETTER. Jewish Times, 1, no. 2:11, 
March 12, 1860. 

Letter to the editor expressing interest in the new publication, 

and encouraging it in its aim “to elevate Judaism and to repre- 

sent it nobly before the non-Jewish world.” (48) 


Dr. GRAETZ. Jewish Times, 1, no. 5:13, April 22, 1869. 
Unsigned. Answers aspersions on the Reform movement 
which had appeared in Graetz’s Monatsschrift. (49) 


CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, I, no. 10:13-14, May 7, 
18609. 

Criticism of Professor Graetz and the theological seminary 

at Breslau. (50) 


UEBER DAS PROSELYTENMACHEN VON SEITEN ISRAELS. 
Jewish Times 1, nO. 115312-13; NO.) 10e1 2 
15:11-12, No. 19:12, June 11 July 0; 160G: 

An essay suggested by an article on the same subject by David 
Einhorn (Jewish Times, 1, no. 12:10-11). Explains the absence 
of all Jewish proselytizing effort by the fact that Jews are a race, 
and racial distinctiveness, important still to preserve, would be 
lessened by the adoption of large numbers of proselytes. It is 
sufficient, moreover, if the universal elements in the Jewish 
religion be accepted. Agreement in religious fundamentals 
does not involve the adoption also of special pecularities of wor- 
ship. The Biblical and Talmudical attitudes toward the ques- 
tion are historically examined. (51) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 297 


DIE ANGEDROHTE SPALTUNG. Jewish Times, 1, no. 20:12- 
13, July 16, 1860. 

Referring to an article by Graetz in Monatsschrift, April, 1869, 

p. 174, B. F. sets aside as negligible the threat of schism between 

Orthodox and Reform Judaism. (52) 


EHEVERBOTE FUR AHRONIDEN. Jewish Times, 1, no. 23: 
11-12, August 6, 1860. 

Discusses further certain points brought up in No. 51. Shows 

the irrationality and the immorality of some of the Biblical 

marriage laws. (53) 


ZEICHEN DER VORZEIT. Jewish Times, 1, no. 26:9-10, 
August 27, 1869. 

Remarks on the strength of the opposition to Reform on the 
part of certain rabbis in Eastern Europe, with illustrations of 
the lengths to which their adherence to traditionalism leads them. 
Contrast is drawn between the emphasis laid by these men on the 
smaller matters of Jewish custom, and the broad spirit of men 
like O. H. Schorr, active in the larger concerns of Jewish science. 
The prediction is made that such mediaeval Kram will before 
many decades have lost its appeal even in Poland. (54) 


GEMASSIGTE UND ENTSCHIEDENE REFORM. Jewish Times, 
POs AatO- 11 eNO. 20. 11-12, SepLemiber 3-17; Log. 

Certain concessions on the part of prominent exponents of 

“conservative Reform” in regard to marriage laws are taken as 

indications that in the near future no real difference will remain 

between the two parties of ‘“‘radicals’”’ and “conservatives.” 

It is shown, however, that the abrogation of any of the Mosaic 

laws is inconsistent with the doctrine of direct scriptural revela- 

tion held by the conservatives, and they are urged to adopt a 

more logical position. (55) 


AUS EINEM BRIEFE DES HERRN Dr. FELSENTHAL IN CHI- 
caco. Jewish Times, 1, no. 32:11, October 8, 18609. 

In praise of the rare wit and learning displayed by M. G. in 
his series of articles, ‘“‘ Franzésisch-jiidische Literatur,” appearing 
in Jewish Times, August 13—October 15, 1869. “‘‘Wo des Him- 
mels habt Ihr denn all’ dies’ Zeug zusammengegabelt ?? The 


298 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


same question which Cardinal von Este asked of the poet of Der 
rasende Roland one would like to put to this M. G. after reading 
one of his essays.”’ (56) 


CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, 1, no. 38:11, November 
1Q, 1869. 

Makes clear his attitude on the Sabbath question, asserting 
that the retention of the Saturday Sabbath is bound up with the 
question of the continued separate existence of Israel. ‘Touches 
on other reforms within Judaism, of which he does heartily 
approve, saying, ‘‘Life of itself is strong enough to eliminate at 
the right time nolens volens all dead matter from the living organ- 
ism. Reform is on the side of life, conservatism on the side of 


death.” (57) 
CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, 1, no. 41:12, December 
10, 1869. ; 


Favorable comment on the character of the discussions in 
Jewish journals of the Philadelphia Conference of Rabbis. (58) 


1870 


ANTRAGE (BEILAGE No. 8). In Protokolle der Rabbiner- 
Conferenz abgehalten zu Philadelphia, November, 1869 
(Philadelphia, 1870), pp. 69-75. 

' A. SCHULWESEN BETREFFEND. On the education of rabbis 
and Jewish teachers. Advises the establishment of elementary 
congregational schools, and of intermediate schools in some of 
the larger cities, and asserts that a rabbinical seminary can be 
established only after provision is made for the necessary prepara- 
tory education. For the immediate present it would seem best 
to send young men having the proper preparation to Germany 
for some years of study. In the religious education of children 
no theological discussion should enter. Certain of the miracle 
stories should be omitted from the Biblical history taught, but 
not those which contain ethical lessons. Attention is called to 
the need for proper textbooks. 

B. EHERECHTLICHES BETREFFEND. On the reform of the 
marriage laws. Maintains that the institution of the Cohanim 
is not justified under modern conditions, and proposes that the 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 290 


Conference declare the special marriage regulations concerning 
the Cohanim, as also their special privileges, to be without sanc- 
tion, and that similar action be taken regarding certain other 
marriage regulations retained from Biblical or Talmudical times, 
among these the requirement of the get (rabbinical decree of 

divorce). | 

C. DEN GOTTESDIENSTLICHEN GESANG BETREFFEND. On syna- 
gogue music. Sets forth the desirability of publishing a collec- 
tion of hymns, the text of which shall contain distinctively Jewish 
thought and possess literary merit, and the music be selected 
in part from traditional synagogue melodies. Original compo- 
sitions and classical music of suitable character may also 
be included. 

D. Dir BILDUNG EINES GEMEINDEVERBANDES BETREFFEND. 
On an association of Reform congregations of America. The 
aims should be the furtherance of undertakings which will 
advance the cause of Reform Judaism and which are not possible 
for single congregations, the publication of liturgical works 
and religious schoolbooks, and the provision of means for the edu- 


cation of teachers and rabbis for Reform congregations. gp) 


[Das VERHALTNISS DER KIRCHE ZU DEN JUDEN.] Jllinots 
Staatszeitung, February 19, 1870. 

A lecture delivered before Hillel Lodge, Chicago. Answers 
the claims made by Reverend Father Gallus Hoch as to the toler- 
ance shown by the Roman Catholic church toward the Jews. 
The historical facts as to Jewish persecution during mediaeval 
times are rehearsed, and it is shown that even at the date of writ- 
ing great intolerance prevailed in the church. ‘“‘It will be differ- 
ent some day. E pur si muove!” (60) 


GEGEN OBERRABBINER FASSEL. Jewish Times, 2:171-72, 
May 13, 1870. 

A reply to the objections raised by Rabbi H. Fassel, of Nagy 
Kanizsa, Hungary, against the resolution of the Philadelphia 
Conference of Rabbis (1869) no longer to require the ritual 
divorce. (See Jewish Times, 2:141.) The resolution of the 
Conference is defended from the Reform standpoint, as against 
the Talmudical, which Fassel represents. (61) 


300 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


PROGRESS OF JEWISH IDEAS. Jewish Times, 2:244-46, June 
17, 1870. Same, with title, Jewish IDEAS CONQUER 
THE WORLD, in American Jewish Pulpit (Cincinnati, 
1881), pp. 67-75. 

A sermon delivered on Shabuoth. A survey of the teachings 
of Judaism and a discussion of their influence, through other 
religions, upon the world. (62) 


DIE ZWEITE CLEVELANDER CONFERENZ. Jewish Tvumes, 
2378-70 W ATOM aAUCUStel 220 OT! 

Criticizes severely the work and motives of the Conference, 
discussing the revision of the prayer book, Minhag America, and 
the relation of the Conference to the Philadelphia Conference of 
1869. (63) 


[To tHE Eprror.] Jewish Times, 2: 391, August 109, 
1870. 

A correction of Rabbi Max Lilienthal’s statement (Jewish 

Times, 2:358) that the Cleveland and Philadelphia Rabbinical 


conferences of 1869 and 1870 did not ‘“‘come into co Ilis ion.” 
(64) 


1871 


CORRESPONDENZ. AUS DEM SECHSTEN District (U.O.B.B.) 
Jewish Times, 3:170, May 12, 1871. 

Explains decision of D.G.L. No. 6 regarding frequency of 

general conferences. (65) 


SAMUEL ZARZA UND ISAAK CANPANTON. Jewish Times, 
3°305500, August To, 1o71. 

Disproves the assertion made by Rabbi A. Huebsch that 
Samuel Zarza was burned at the stake in 1380. Examines the 
historical evidence in detail. ‘There are remarks upon the impor- 
tance of making historical researches in a purely objective spirit. 

(66) 


[SAMUEL ZARZA AND ISAAC CANPANTON.] Ha-Zofe be-Erez 
ha-Hadashah, September 29—October 30, 1871. 
Supplementary to No. 66. (67) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 301 


ZUR KRITIK DES Manwariyt. Hebrew Leader, October 13, 
1871. | 

Discusses the interpretation of the word Erdépfel in a passage 

in the Book of Maharil, with its bearing on the genuineness of 

the passage. Refers to article in Hebrew Leader, September 20. 

(68) 

CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, 3:570, November 3, 1871. 

Describes the extreme need existing among large numbers of 

Jews in Chicago after the fire of October 9, and defends the col- 

lection of special funds for Jews, asserting that such special 

collections do not imply narrow sympathies. (69) 


THe [.0.B.B. RELIEF COMMITTEE OF CHICAGO AND ITS 
Dorncs. Jewish Times, 3:602, November 17, 1871. 
As president of the B’nai B’rith Relief Committee after the 
fire, B. F. appeals for further aid from co-religionists in other 
cities. (70) 
CORRESPONDENZ. Jewish Times, 3:635, November 24, 1871. 
Discusses distribution of funds collected by I.0.B.B. among 
members of the order. An explanation called forth by a letter 
protesting mildly against discrimination against non-members. 
(See Jewish Times, 3:596.) Again defends,separate collections, 
asserting that they are justified on psychological as well as on 
practical grounds. (71) 


EIN NEUES GEBETBUCH. (Review of B. Szold’s Abodat 
Yisrael.) Jewish Times, 3:733, December 29, 1871. 

From the point of view of those who still believe it possible 

to retain the old forms of worship (of whom the reviewer is not 

one), the book is pronounced excellent. As regards content, it 

is found to contain the essential ideas of Jewish Reform. (72) 


1872 


*Toe WANDERING Jew. A STATEMENT TO A CHRISTIAN 
AUDIENCE OF THE JEWISH VIEW OF JuDAISM. (Chicago 
Pulpit Extra, No. 1.) Chicago: Carpenter and Shel- 
don [1872]. rt4pp. 8vo. Samein Jewish Times, 3:779, 


302 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


799-800, 819, January 19—February 2, 1872; also in 
A Set of Holiday Sermons (Chicago, 1906), pp. 35-48. 
(Reprinted in this volume.) 

Address delivered before the Chicago Young Men’s Christian 
Union, January 7, 1872. On the gifts which Israel, the Wander- 
ing Jew, has made to humanity—the Bible, the doctrine of mono- 
theism, the moral laws governing. modern civilization, and 
others. (73) 


BEITRAGE ZUM VERSTANDNISSE DER BIBLISCHEN EHEGE- 
SETZE. Jewish Times, 4:397-98, 417-18, 457-58, July 
Merron AMBUSAERSIE gi) AW ogi 2 

Historical and critical examination of the marriage laws of 
the Bible, with some reference to marriage customs in primitive 
society and in various non-Jewish nations. ‘The changes in inter- 
pretation of the Mosaic Law in Talmudic times are traced, and 
the validity of these laws at the present time is tested from the 
modern viewpoint in science and morals. The conclusion 
reached is that they no longer have any authority for us today. 
Exception is made as to the marriage of near relatives. 





(74) 
GEIGER’S “ JUDISCHE ZEITSCHRIFT FUR WISSENSCHAFT UND 
LEBEN.” Jewish Times, 4:781, November 22, 1872. 

Calls attention to the great value of the journal and briefly 

indicates the position of Geiger as an exponent of Jewish science. 

(75) 

DER NEUE “ MINHAG AMERIKA.” Jewish Times, 4:870-71, 
December 20, 1872. 

Severe criticism of the prayer book of this title. Continued 

in Nos. 77-78. (76) 


1873 
ZUR KRITIK DES MINHAG AMERIKA. Jewish Times, 4:929-30, 
January I0, 1873. 
A reply to a letter in Jewish Times, 4: 8090. (77) 
UEBER NEPHESH, NAPHSCHOTH HAMETHIM, U.S.W. Jewish 
Times, 4:978, January 31, 1873. (78) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 303 


[To THE Epiror.| Jewish Times, 4:987, February 7, 1873. 
Account of convention of D.G.L. No. 6, [.0.B.B., with com- 
ment upon the affairs of the lodge in general. (79) 


THE CINCINNATI CONFERENCE: REASONS WHY CHICAGO 
CONGREGATIONS DECLINE TO SEND DELEGATES. Jew- 
Ise Lines... 5° 200,,|UlY 11,,107 3. 

Letter to the Board of Representatives of the Jewish congrega- 
tions in Cincinnati. Signed by officers of Zion Congregation, 
but written by B. F. The letter protests at some length against 
the proposal to form a second ‘‘union of congregations,” and 
against the establishment of another Jewish theological school. 
‘The arguments concerning the latter are identical in substance 
with those expressed in a motion submitted by B. F. at the Rab- 
binical Conference at Philadelphia, 1869. Cf. No. 59 A. . (80) 


REMARKS ON SOME PoINntTs IN JEWISH Law. Albany Law 
aio OO UO 22 710. 202-02) OCLODE TN 2 Saas 
November 8, 1873. 

Occasioned by an article, ‘“‘Desultory Suggestions in Reading 
Historic Law,” by Judge Philip J. Joachimsen (Albany Law 
Journal, 8:193-95), which referred to Talmudic law. B. F. 
points out errors in this article and discusses the Prosbul (docu- 
ment which enabled one to collect from a debtor after the Sab- 
batical year), and the Jewish law of divorce. In the second part 
of the article, pp. 276-77, a scene in a courtroom in Nazareth at 
the beginning of the Christian Era is sketched, illustrating the 
legal procedure. : (81) 


AN ANSWER TO AN ANSWER. Albany Law Journal, 8:382- 
Oa mWecember, 13,1073: 

Follows a reply by Judge Joachimsen to No. 81. (See Albany 

Law Journal, 8:325-27.) Contains brief additional remarks 

on Prosbul and on Jewish divorce. (82) 


1874 


Tue ‘‘SHAPIRA”? SWINDLE. Nation, 18:171, March 12, 1874. 
A letter concerning the spurious Moabitic antiquities purchased 


for the Berlin Museum by the Prussian government in 1873. (33) 
83 


304 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


A PANORAMA OF JEWISH History. Ms. 1874. 18 pp. 
Address delivered before the Chicago Young Men’s Christian 
Union, April 6, 1874. A survey and characterization of the four 
periods of Jewish history, with remarks on the religion of the fu- 
ture. Asecond Ms., which appears to have been a first draft 
of this, touches also on the distinction between the religion of 
Christ and the Christian religion. (84) 


THE ‘‘WINE” OF THE BIBLE. Chicago Tribune, April 16, 
1874. Same in Jewish Times, 6:136-37, April 24, 1874. 

A letter to the editor, refuting the assertion made in a religious 
conference that the wine of the Bible meant in all cases the unfer- 
mented juice of the grape. ‘“‘It is a vain attempt to deprave the 
religion of the Bible into a religion of ascetic austerity. A cheer- 
ful and happy enjoyment of the blessings of the earth is fully in 
accordance with the letter and the spirit of the Scriptures.” (3) 

a 
THE BIBLE AND WINE. Chicago Tribune, April 23, 1874. 
Same in Jewish Times, 6:148-49, May 1, 1874. 

A reply to a sermon of the Rev. S. M. McChesney, which took 
issue with statements made in the above article (No. 85). (See 
Chicago Tribune, April 20, 1874.) The present article brings 
forward proof that wine is mentioned without disfavor in the 
Bible, and that its use on certain occasions was even enjoined 
by Biblical law. Opposes the total abstinence movement on the 
ground that it is not the best method of furthering the cause of 
temperance. (86) 


THE JEWISH CALENDAR. Young Israel, 4:686-95, Novem- 
ber, 1874. 

Methods of calculation explained in detail, with examples. 

In dialogue form. (87) 


Dr. ABRAHAM GEIGER. NEKROLOG. Jllinois Staatszeitung, 
November 13, 1874. Same in Jewish Times, 6:622, 
November 20, 1874. 

Brief biographical survey with critical estimate. Includes 
excerpt from letter of Geiger to B. F., written a few weeks before 
his death. (88) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 305 


Dr. ABRAHAM GEIGER... In Geddchinissfeier fiir Dr. Abraham 
Geiger. [Chicago, 1874.] 2pp. Fol. Reprinted from 
Illinois Staatszeitung, November 18, 1874. 

One of five addresses delivered at memorial service, Chicago, 
November 15, 1874. Recounts with profound appreciation 
Geiger’s great and varied achievements in the field of Jewish 
science, showing the significance of his researches in relation to 
the Reform movement. Touches also on his practical efforts for 
Reform in synagogue, conference, and Jewish institution of learn- 
ing. ‘‘He was the Master, we others the disciples; and always 
we looked up to him with love and gratitude.” (89) 


1875 


ISRAEL IN AMERICA. Chicago Tribune, January 17, 1875. 
Same in Jewish Times, 6:760, January 22, 1875, included 
in editorial, ‘‘The Duty of the Hour.” 

An address delivered before the Grand Lodge, I.0.B.B., at 
its annual meeting, Chicago, January, 1875. Describes the reli- 
gious condition of the Jews in America. The situation is found to 
be alarming, the existence of a separate Jewish community being 
threatened through the increasing religious indifference and the 
lack of all Jewish knowledge on the part of the rising generation. 

(90) 


THE SECRET CHARACTER OF THE ORDER B’NAI B’RITH. A 
Minority Report. Chicago Times, January 31, 1875. 
Same in Jewish Times, 6:805, February 12, 1875. 

In favor of removing the final remnants of secrecy in the order. 


(gr) 


Dr. ZACHARIAS FRANKEL. NEKROLOG. Illinois Staats- 
zettung, March 9g, 1875. 

An appreciation of Frankel’s important researches in the field 
of Talmudic literature, and a characterization of his religious 
attitude. ‘‘He lacked what Alexander von Humboldt called the 
courage of one’s convictions.”’ (92) 


306 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


REVIEW OF R. B. Smith’s Mohammed and Mohammedanism. 

Nation, 20:349, May 20, 1875. 

(93) 

THE BIBLE IN THE SCHOOLS. Chicago Tribune, November 

6, 1875. Same in Chicago Times, November 6, and in 
Jewish Times, 7:584-86, November 12, 1875. 

Following the exclusion by the Chicago Board of Education of 
Bible reading from the public schools, a number of citizens 
petitioned the Board to rescind their action. It was stated, 
among other reasons, that “ours is a Christian civilization,” 
and ‘‘this is a Christian state.” This letter urges the Board not 
to yield, on the ground, first, that this is not a Christian state, 
second, that the Bible, in its entirety, is of very little value for 
educational purposes. ‘The importance of definite ethical instruc- 
tion of another type is, however, emphasized. ‘Even if we 
should admit (which we however do not) that it is but a minority 
who favor the exclusion of the Bible from the schools, would it 
not be an inexcusable, an undemocratic, an un-American tyran- 
nizing by an accidental majority, to force their religious views 
and practices upon an unwilling minority ?” 

In regard to ethical training, ‘‘the state has not only a right, 
it has the duty to provide for the moral training of the rising gen- 
erations. ‘The too materialistic character of American schools 
should be counterbalanced by introducing into them a number 
of such studies as would, if of no measurable value in practical 
life, have the tendency to ennoble the heart, to better the senti- 
ments, to purify the will, and to give to the whole mind a higher 
turn.” (94) 


Is CHRISTIANITY A PART OF THE ComMMON LAW OF THE 
Country? Albany Law Journal, 12:359-60, Decem- 
ber 4, 1875. Same in Jewish Times, 7:709, January 
Fey aitelr Loy 

A letter to the editor quoting a conversation between the 
author and a Chicago lawyer. Reference is made to Thomas 
Jefferson’s “unanswerable disquisition”’ on the subject, printed 


as appendix to “Reports of Virginia Cases.” Cf. No. 94. 
(95) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 307 


1876 


REVIEW OF James Picciotto’s Sketches of Anglo-Jewish His- 
tory. Nation, 22:102-3, February 10, 1876. 

Unfavorable review, continued on pp. 245-46 in a note by the 

editor, for which material was furnished by B. F. (96) 


UNTER WELCHEN BEDINGUNGEN SIND DIE PFORTEN 
UNSERER GOTTESHAUSER PFORTEN DER GERECHTIG- 
KEIT? Jewish Times, 8:171-74, May 12, 1876. 

A sermon delivered at the dedication of Sinai Temple, Chicago, 
April 8, 1876. Sets forth the main principles of Judaism and of 
Jewish religious life, and touches upon religious indifference, the 
historical Sabbath, and the danger to Judaism of giving up its 
distinguishing characteristics. (97) 


[OPINIONS ON CERTAIN QUESTIONS CONNECTED WITH THE 
ESTABLISHMENT OF A JEWISH SEMINARY.| In Hebrew 
Theological Seminary Association. Proceedings of the 
First Convention, May 24-25, 7876 (New York, 1876), 
Deel 2 Ome AIG Ie CISL) LIMes wo. 22 7 3A Ine Os 
with title, OPINION ON THE HEBREW COLLEGE QUESTION, 

In answer to a circular letter, opposes the establishment of a 
theological seminary at this time. It is asserted that the neces- 
sary preparation for such an institution could not be obtained 
in America. If, however, its establishment in some form is 
inevitable, the endowment of professorial chairs in ‘‘some well- 
known American university’? is considered preferable to the 
erection of a separate institution. Emphasizes instead the need 
of preparatory schools for the people in general. (98) 


To THE Epitor. Jewish Times, 8:231, June 9, 1876. 
Repeats briefly and more emphatically the arguments brought 
forward in No. 98. ‘‘We should take care that in American 
Israel there are not on one side a few learned priests and on the 
other side thousands of ignorant laymen.” (99) 


THE MISSION OF JUDAISM. Ms. 1876. 14 pp. 
A lecture delivered before Hillel Lodge, Chicago, November 
16, 1876. ‘The mission of Israel, as “‘a kingdom of priests and a 
holy nation” (Exod. 19:6), is compared with the mission of 


308 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Greece, Rome, the United States, and various other nations. 
“Every nation has its own calling; every nation has to bring its 
own and peculiar contributions towards the erection and com- 
pletion of the grand temple of mankind. . . . The mission of 
Israel is not yet fully consummated, and it is therefore necessary 
that a race continue to exist ever conscious of the high custodian- 
ship over the most sublime religious truths reposed in them, and 
ever mindful of the duties they have to fulfill in consequence of 
the special mission with which they are entrusted.” (100) 


SOLLEN WIR FERNER NOCH JUDEN BLEIBEN? Ms. 1876. 
14 pp. 

Address delivered before Ramah Lodge, Chicago, December 6, 

1876. Identical in substance with No. 100. (ror) 


UEBER JUDISCHE ERZIEHUNG. UEBER UNTERRICHTS- UND 
ERZIEHUNGSWESEN UNTER DEN JUDEN. Ms. 1876. 

IO pp. 
Address delivered before Ramah Lodge, Chicago, December 
20, 1876. A survey of Jewish education from the earliest times, 
with discussion of the present need in America for more systema- 
tized and thorough instruction in Jewish subjects. (102) 


Ory 


UEBER DEN URSPRUNG DES CHRISTENTHUMS. Ms. 1877. 
17 Pp- 

“Mit besonderem Bezug auf Bruno Bauer’s Christus und die 
Cdsaren.”’ Sub-title. Refutes the claim that Christianity had 
its beginnings in Graeco-Roman thought. Judaism is shown to 
be its main source. The introduction discusses the value of 
investigation of origins in connection with the study of any sub- 
ject. (103) 


Vom JUDISCHEN SCHULVEREIN IN CuHIcAGO. Libanon. Bei- 
blatt zu *‘ Young Israel,’ 3:21-27, February, 1877. 

Reproduces, with brief introduction and concluding comment, 

the opinion (Gutachten) signed Adler, Felsenthal, Kohler, Norden 

(written by B. F.), submitted to the Jewish Educational Society 

of Chicago, on the purposes, principles, and methods of such a 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 309 


society. Deals with the danger for Judaism in America in allow- 

ing Jewish youth to grow up without knowledge of Jewish religion 

and history, and Hebrew language and literature. A day school 

where Jewish subjects may be included in the general curriculum 

is considered the most effective method of dealing with the prob- 

lem. ‘The establishment of Sabbath schools throughout the city, 

and of a system of lectures on Jewish subjects, is also discussed. 

(104) 

BARUCH SPINOZA. EINE GEDENKREDE. Der Westen, Febru- 
ALE 25 LO 77: 

Abstract of address delivered in Zion Temple on the two 
hundredth anniversary of the death of Spinoza. Biographical 
survey with remarks on Spinoza’s influence as a philosopher and 
his relation to Judaism. (105) 


“Diz jUDISCHE NATIONALITAT.” Illinois Staatszeitung, 
March 24, 1877. Same in Libanon. Beiblatt zu ‘‘ Young 
Steam = 70, VAY, 1O7 7. 

A letter giving the arguments for considering Jews a race 
rather than a religious community. ‘Touches on the question 
of intermarriage and its results for Judaism. “Individuals do 
not count for much in the world. They are disappearing 
atoms, and, by a natural law which holds in the spiritual 
realm as well as in the physical, they are attracted to larger 
masses. Only organized institutions endure. And Judaism is 
therefore an organism still very necessary to the world. The 
time is still far distant when its usefulness will be over.” (106) 

IO 

REVIEW OF Outlines of Hebrew Grammar (G. Bickell), trans- 

lated by Samuel Ives Curtiss, Jr. Nation, 24:371, 


PUNE 211577; (107) 


ZUM KAPITEL DES SONNTAGSGESETZ. PARALLELEN AUS DEM 
JUDISCHEN Recut. Reformer and Jewish Times, 9, 
N01970;)n0, 19:0, June 20-—July 0, 1377. 

On the legality, according to Talmudic law, of contracts made 
on the Sabbath. An article occasioned by judicial decisions 
made in Maine and elsewhere in the United States. Under Jew- 
ish law such contracts are shown to be legal. (108) 


310 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


WHo Is a JEw? Ms. 1877. 10 pp. 

A lecture delivered before Zion Literary Association, Chicago, 
October 19, 1877. Maintains that Jewish birth and not accept- 
ance of Jewish religious doctrine (except in the case of proselytes) 
is the criterion of Jewishness. (109) 


JiIscHE ZEIT- UND STREITFRAGEN. Libanon. Beiblait 
zu ““Voung Israel,” 3:178-80; 4:1-4, December, 1877— 
January, 1878. 

Deals with ‘‘the most vital Jewish problem which has arisen 
since the return from Babylon’’—whether Judaism as a distinct 
religion will continue to exist in the future. By way of intro- 
duction the nature and necessity of religion in any form is con- 
sidered. (110) 


1878' 


WEGE UND ZIELE NEUESTER JUDISCHER GESCHICHTE. In 
Illustrated Hebrew Almanac for the Year 5639 (New 
York, 1878), pp. 22-27. 

Résumé of causes and tendencies in Jewish history from Men- 
delssohn to the date of writing. An explanation and defense of 
Reform, and a warning against reforms which take no account 
of the past, and which are therefore not only anti-Orthodox but 
anti-Jewish in their results. (111) 


*Z7UR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM. Chicago: E. 
Rubovits, 1878. 48 pp. 8vo. Contents: ZuR PRos- 
ELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM, pp. 7-38; NACHTRAG- 
LICHE BEMERKUNGEN UBER GLAUBENSFREIHEIT IM 
JUDENTHUM, pp. 39-48. Same, with omissions, in 
Neuzeit (Vienna), 18:46-47, 54-55, 62-63, 69-71, 77-78, 
84-85, 102, 105-10, 117-16, 134-35, 140-40 ue 
Bebruary, 6--./Une 25,1575: , 

An opinion in regard to circumcision as a requirement for Jew- 
ish proselytes. In the light of the universal character of the 
Jewish religion, the rite is not considered indispensable. ‘The 


The chronological arrangement has been departed from between No. 112 
and No. 117 in order to bring together controversial articles which supplement 
Zur Proselytenfrage im Judenthum. 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 311 


attitude in Biblical and Talmudical times toward the general 
question of acceptance of proselytes and toward the circumcision 
of proselytes in particular is reviewed. ‘‘Let us not seal our 
gates hermetically. Let us rather, in harmony with the words 
and the spirit of the prophets, and contrary to the teachings of 
the narrow and casuistic and minutiose Halachah, keep them 
wide open for those who seek religious satisfaction and religious 
peace among us.” ‘The appended essay discusses the absence 
of dogma in Judaism. 

Notice, in Archives Israelites, 39:162; notice, with summary by 
B. F., in Monatsschrift fiir Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Juden- 
thums, 27:236-40. Summaries in M. Steinschneider, Hebrdische 
Bibliographie, 18:11-12; in Chicago Tribune, September 8, 1878. 
Reviews in Allgemeine Zeitung des Judenthums, 24:139-40; 
Deborah, 23,n0. 3:2; Israelit (Mainz), 19:347-49, 375-77; Jewish 
Advance; by M. Mielziner in Jewish Messenger, 43, no. 12:5; 
Jewish Record; Jewish World (London), no. 261:3; Reformer and 
Jewish Times, 9, no. 48 (separate articles in English and German 
sections). Controversial articles by various persons, including 
four letters from B. F. (cf. No. 113) in Israelitische Presse, 2, 
nos. 6-26, February 8—July 5, and in Supplement to Jsrael- 
itische Presse, 2, nos. 28-31, July 19—August 9. (112) 


[ZUR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM.] Israelitische Presse, 
2, NOS. Q, 10, 11-12, 24-25, March 1—June 28, 1878. 

In Hebrew, except third article, which is in German with 

Hebrew characters. Chiefly comment on the tone of articles in 

controversy in Israelitische Presse. Ci. No. 112. (113) 


ZUR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM. Reformer and Jew- 
ish Times, 10, no. 1:6, March 1, 1878. 

Supplementary to No. 112. Deals with the opinions as to 
necessary ceremonial prerequisites for initiation of proselytes 
held by the rabbis of the Talmud. A passage from the Talmud 
(Yebamoth, 46 a, b) is included in translation. (114) 


ZUR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM. Reformer and Jew- 
ish Times, 10, no. 3:6, March 15, 1878. 

Gives the substance of a personal letter from O. H. Schorr, 

of Brody, Galicia, in which Schorr expresses his agreement with 


312 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


the conclusions of B. F.’s brochure, but offers new interpretations 
of certain Talmudic passages therein referred to. (115) 


THE INITIATION OF PROSELYTES. Jewish Messenger, 43, 
no. 17:4-5, May 3, 1878. 

A reply to the review by M. Mielziner of Zur Proselytenfrage 

im Judenthum (Jewish Messenger, 43, no. 12:5). B. F. defends 


himself against the charge of Jesuitical reasoning. 
(116) 


RELIGION UND Race. Jllinois Staatszeitung, September 11, 
1878. Same in Jewish Advance, 1, no. 15:6—-7, Septem- 
DETR 20, Mar Gi. 

Answer to a criticism by K. Kohler, in previous issue, of Zur 
Proselytenfrage im Judenthum. B. F. declares himself against 
exclusion of proselytes for the sake of maintaining the purity of 
the race. ‘‘The Jewish religion need not be forever bound up 
with race.” (117) 


TYPOGRAPHICAL Errors [IN HEBREW Books]. Jewish 
Messenger, 43, no. 6:5, February 8, 1878. 

A brief article. The distinction is made between errors 
‘caused by ignorance,” and those which are the result of “the 
oversight of an over-worked corrector.”’ ‘So erben sich nicht 
bloss Gesetz’ und Rechte, sondern auch Druckfehler wie eine 
ewige Krankheit fort.” (118) 


SCHILLER ALS DRAMATISCHER DICHTER. Ms. 1878. 1I7pp. 
Address before Ramah Lodge, May 1, 1878. (119) 


GERMANISMS IN HEBREW. Jewish Advance, I, no. 3:4, 
June 28, 1878. 


Briei article calling attention to Germanisms in certain modern 
Hebrew works. (120) 


va pw Israelitische Presse, 2, no. 42:5, November 1, 
1878. 

In Hebrew. Interprets the Talmudic expression 77 Sw to 

mean, “Let the debtor escape, and the guarantor be made lable.” 


(121) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 313 


[THE Stupy or JewisH History.] Ms. 1878. 13 pp. 


Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, December 
21, 1878. (122) 


1879 


THE SOCIETY FOR ETHICAL CULTURE. Jewish Advance, 2, 
nos. 30-34, January 3-24, 1870. 

A comparison of the principles of the society with those of 

Reform Judaism, with a discussion of the causes which led to its 

establishment, and its possible future influence. (123) 


[Minna KLEEBERG.] Nacurur. Jewish Advance, 2, no. 
2Ua74) January, 10, 1870. 
(124) 
THE JEWS OF SPAIN IN THE Mippre AcEs. Ms. 1870. 
13 pp: 
Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, January 
D7 L070: (125) 


ENGLISH AND GERMAN JEWS IN THE MIppLE AGEs. Ms. 
1370801 2.pp- 

Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, February 

14, 1879. An account of persecutions suffered, with description 

of outstanding events, such as the massacre of York. (126) 


ERWIDERUNG. Jewish Advance, 2, nos. 36-37, February 
PA—21s 1570: 

A reply to “Race oder Glaubensgenossenschaft” (Jewish 
Advance, 2, no. 34:7, unsigned) in which issue was taken with 
opinions expressed in No. 123. B. F. repeats his conviction that 
Israel is primarily a race, and only secondarily a religious com- 
munity. Continued in No. 128. (127) 


WEITERES UBER DIE FRAGE: OB RACE, OB RELIGIONS- 
GENOSSENSCHAFT. Jewish Advance, 2, no. 39:7, March 


7, 1879. 
(128) 


314 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


UEBER MAGNETE UND TELEGRAPHEN IN DEN SCHRIFTEN 
UNSERER ALTEN. I[sraelitische Presse, 3, no. 16, April 

25, 1879. 
In German, with Hebrew characters. Answers a question 
which had appeared in the previous number, regarding state- 
ments made in Shelah, by Isaiah Horowitz (1649). (129) 


JEwIsH CHAUVINISM. Jewish Advance, 3, no. 53:5, June 13, 
1879. Same in Reformer and Jewish Times, 11, no. 
17 <155) Une 620, ms 70. 

A lecture, delivered before Zion Literary Association. On the 
tendency of Jews to praise everything Jewish, to claim eminent 
men as Jews, to trace modern culture in all its aspects to Jewish 
sources. ‘‘Modern . . . civilization is a complex whole, formed 
by the mingling of two great rivers of culture running through 
the history of mankind. . . . It was a sort of historic collabora- 
tion, a blending of Semitic and Aryan ideas, by which our first 
culture has been brought forth. . . . But is it not glory enough 
for us that the thinking world is forced to admit that modern 
culture owes its Religion to Israel ?” (130) 


Danna N wip Lsraelitische Presse, 3, no. 24, June 20, 1879. 
Questions a statement in Maimonides concerning the omer of 


barley. (131) 
YAM SUPH’S GEMAUSCHEL. JIIlinois Staatszeitung, August 
QTL: 


Letter to the editor, expressing indignation over the use of 
an “abominable Jewish jargon” in an article signed “‘ Yam 
Suph,” which had appeared in Deborah. ‘To B. F. this seems like 
a retrogression to the old days before Moses Mendelssohn, before 
Jews had learned to use pure German and had not entered into 
the life of Western culture. Some general remarks on certain 
depressing conditions in American Judaism close the brief article. 

(132) 

1880 : 

*ya5" q722 HEBREW READER. Chicago: Max Stern, 
1880. 43 pp. 8vo. 


Second edition, 1886, added four pages for beginners. ’ 
(133 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 315 


THE JEws oF Cuicaco. In R. Blanchard, Discovery and 
Conquests of the Northwest, with the History of Chicago 
(Wheaton [IIl.], 1880), pp. 628-34. 


An outline of the history of the Jews in Chicago from its settle- 
ment'to 1880. Cf. No. 240. (134) 


EIN LITERARISCHES DEPARTMENT BETREFFEND. Zeitgeist, 
1:10, January 1, 1880. 


Discusses books as documents of contemporary social history, 
and as influences upon individuals and social groups, and con- 
siders the question what books are advisable to review in a Jew- 
ish periodical. (135) 


ON THE PRESENT STATUS OF MODERN Juparsm. Ms. 1880. 
II pp. 

Presented at a meeting of the ‘‘Round Table,’’ a society com- 

posed of ministers of liberal churches, in Chicago, February 3, 

1880. Outlines the religious beliefs prevailing among Jews in 

Western Europe and America. (136) 


ADOLPHE CREMIEUX. Jewish Advance, 4, no. 92:1, March 
12, 1880. ) 


Address delivered at the memorial service in Sinai Temple, 
Chicago, March 7, 1880. Outlines the activities of Crémieux in 
ameliorating the condition of the Jews, narrating certain historic 
incidents with dramatic detail. Points to “the shining example 
of Adolphe Crémieux that one can be a warm-hearted active 
Israelite besides being a cosmopolitan.” (127) 


ZUR FRAGE UBER MISCHEHEN. Zetigeist, 1:130-32, April 
15, 1880. 


Considers the subject both historically and from the viewpoint 
of modern Judaism. Maintains that the regrettable feature 
of intermarriage is not the mingling of blood but the falling away 
from Judaism of the descendants of mixed marriages. Advises, 
as a means of preventing this, that the non-Jewish parties to 
such marriages be accepted as proselytes without unnecessary 
formality. (138) 


316 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


[OPINION ON QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY DISTRICT GRAND 
LopcE No. 6, 1.0.B.B.] Jewish Advance, 4, no. 102: 5, 
May 21, 1880. Same in Report of Executive Committee 
of Constitution Grand Lodge I.0.B.B., 1880-1881 (New 
York, 1881),;'pp. 112-10. 

A document submitted in Appeal XLVI (I.0.B.B. Court of 
Appeals). Answers the question, whether the child of a mixed 
marriage is to be considered a Jew, affirmatively, “provided he 
himself desires to be considered one.”’ The second question 
refers to initiatory rites which a candidate must undergo in order 
to become an Israelite, and is answered as in No. 112. 

(139) 

MEINE STELLUNG IN DER MISCHEHENFRAGE. Deborah, 25, 
no! 24:2). |une m1; 1880: 

Holds that intermarriage is undesirable from the standpoint 
of preservation of Judaism, that it frequently results in unhap- 
piness, but that it is not for these reasons to be considered 
immoral. Distinguishes between Jewish race and Jewish religion, 
and denies that it is a duty to preserve unchanged the limits of 
Jewish nationality. (140) 


[On SELF-IMPROVEMENT.| Ms. 1880. 10 pp. 
Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, June 18, 
1880. (141) 


REVIEW OF F. De Sola Mendes’s Concise Lexicon to the Tal- 
muds, Targums, and Midrash Works. Zeitgeist, 1:203, 
June 24, 1880. 

Brief notice. (142) 


REVIEW OF E. Schreiber’s Die Selbstkritik der Juden. Zeit- 
geist, 1:253, August 5, 1880. 

Favorable review of book called forth by anti-Semitic move- 

ment in Germany, which boldly points out the failings and weak- 

nesses of the Jews. (143) 


REVIEW OF J. S. Bloch’s Quellen und Parallelen zu Lessing’s 
“Nathan.” Zeitgeist, 1:261, August 19, 1880. 

Contains observations on Jewish humanitarianism and toler- 

ance. (144) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Biz 


REvIEw OF Ueber die Philanthropie des Mosaischen Gesetzes 

(Philo). Uebersetzt und erlaiutert von M. Friedlander. 
Zeitgeist, 1:261, August 19, 1880. 

(145) 

“APPEAL No. 46.” Jewish Advance, 5, no. 116:4—-5, August 

27, 1880. 

Discusses in its practical bearings a decision rendered by the 

Court of Appeals of I.O.B.B. in a case bearing on the eligibility 

for membership in the order of the offspring of mixed marriages. 

Cf. No. 139. (146) 


REVIEW OF Mischnath Hammidoth. Die erste geometrische 
Schrift in hebraischer Sprache. Uebersetzt und erlau- 
tert von H. Schapira. Jewish Advance, 5, no. 117:73 
no. 126:7, September 3—November 5, 1880. 

Unsigned. B. F. sets the probable date of the book between 
the seventh and tenth centuries, differing in this point from the 
translator. (147) 


REvIEW OF M. Giidemann’s Geschichte des Erziehungswesens 

und der Cultur der Juden in Frankreich und Deutschland 

vom 10. bis zum 14. Jahrhundert. Zetigeist, 1:305, 
September 16, 1880. 

Includes observations on the historian’s use of sources and 

the writing of history. (148) 


[IN REFERENCE TO SABBATH SCHOOLS.| Hebrew Review, 
Peso 2 clover Tinoco, 

Report of Committee on Resolutions offered by M. Mielziner. 
Occurs in Proceedings of Rabbinical Literary Association of Amer- 
ica, July 13-15, 1880. Cf. No. 227, which develops the subject 
at greater length, but is identical in substance and partly in text 
with this. (149) 


RELIGIONSPHILOSOPHIE. (Review of J. J. Riilf’s Der Ein- 
heitsgedanke.) Zeitgeist, 1:351, October 28, 1880. 

The review contains remarks on Jewish contributions to the 

philosophy of religion. | (150) 


318 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


REVIEW OF S. Sekles’s Poetry of the Talmud. Nation, 31: 331, 

November 4, 1880. 

(151) 

REVIEW OF J. Hamburger’s Realencyclopddie fiir Bibel und 

Talmud. Zeitgeist, 1:385; 3:108-9, November 25, 

1880; March 30, 1882. 

(152) 

TALMUDISCHE DIALEKTIK. (Review of A. Hahn’s Sepher 

Okere Harim. The Rabbinical Dialectics.) Zeitgeist, 
1;417, December 23, 1880, 

In part an independent discussion of the subject of the book. 

(153) 


1881 


SCHILLER. Ms. 1881. 10 pp. 
Incomplete manuscript of an address delivered before Zion 
Literary Association, February 4, 188r. (154) 


NEUHEBRAISCH. (Review of Die Juden [Lessing]. In’s 
Hebriaische tibersetzt von H. L. Teller.) Zeitgeist, 
2:100, March 17, 1881. 

The article is chiefly given over to a discussion of the use of 
Hebrew as a language medium in modern writing. (155) 


REviEw oF P. I. Hershon’s A Talmudical Miscellany, or A 
Thousand and One Extracts from the Talmud. Nation, 
32:156, March 3, 1881. (156) 


Zu Dr. S. ADLER’S ABHANDLUNG UBER ‘TALMUDISCHE 
GLAUBENSLEHRE. (Review of Adler’s ‘‘Tenets of Faith 
and Their Authority in the Talmud,’’ Hebrew Review, 
I:193-205.) Jewish Advance, 6, no. 150:7; no. I51:7. 

Contains a digression on the subject of Jewish nationality, 
deploring the emphasis placed upon it by certain Reform rabbis. 
(157) 


REvIEW OF E. Lehmann’s Gabriel Riesser, ein Rechtsanwalt. 
Zeitgeist, 2:196, June 9, 1881. 

An independent essay rather than a review. Describes Riesser 

as a forceful and admirable character. ‘His attitude was not 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 319 


that of a humble petitioner, begging for privileges, but that of 
a free-born citizen, courageously demanding his eternal and 
natural rights.” (158) 


“SIND SIE FUR ODER GEGEN EINE SYNODE?” (AUS EINEM 
BRIEFE.) Jewish Advance, 7, no. 158:7, June 17, 1881. 
Same in Zeitgeist, 2:209, June 23, 1881. 

Reasons for opposing a synod. (159) 


REvIEws OF L. Rauchmann’s Religidse Scheidewinde, 
W. Molchow’s Ist der Pentateuch von Moses verfasst ? 
and Die jiidischen S'‘peisegesetze, by ““Theologus.” Zeit- 
ETS 2 th) | | UNG PaETOO Tr: 

Summaries of the three pamphlets, all radical in character, 
with brief discussion of Bible criticism and its doubtful value 
for the people in general, dietary laws, synods, assimilation, and 
tolerance of the opinions of others. (160) 


PROFESSOR DELITZSCH UBER INTERCONFESSIONELLES VER- 
HALTEN. Zetigeist, 2:304-5, September 15, 1881. 

Unsigned. A defense of Jewish candor on the subject of Jesus 

and Christianity. Expresses great impatience with the disre- 

spectful manner in which Christianity has been occasionally 

referred to in Jewish journals, in this agreeing with the published 

protest of Delitzsch, but contends that courtesy does not demand 

that Jews remain silent on Christian topics. Quotes with 

approval Geiger’s view of Jesus, as, personally, ‘‘eine unbedeu- 

tende Erscheinung.”’ Cf. No. 172. (161) 


REvIEWS OF L. R. Landau’s Die Reformation im Judenthum, 
J. S. Bloch’s Jean Bodin, ein franzdsischer Staaismann 
und KRechtslehrer, ein Vorldufer Lessings aus dem 16. 
Jahrhundert, and M. Mannheimer’s Das Gebetbuch u. der 
Religionsunterricht. Zeitgeist, 2:355, October 27, 1881. 

The second of the three reviews contains a characterization of 
Bodin and his chief work. (162) 


GABRIEL RiEssER. Ms. 1881. 16 pp. 
Address delivered before Zion Literary Association, October 
28, 1881. Riesser is eulogized as champion of Jewish rights in 
Germany. (163) 


320 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Dir WISSENSCHAFT DES JUDENTHUMS. IHR WESEN UND 
THRE THEILE. Zeitgeist, 2:372-73, 386-87, November 
10-24, 1881. Same, in English, with title, THE SCIENCE 
OF JupaIsmM. Irs NATURE AND Its Divisions. Hebrew 
Review, 2:28-41, 1882. 


Read before the Rabbinical Literary Association at its annual 


meeting in Chicago, July 11, 1881. ‘‘The science of Judaism is 
concerned not merely with the religion of the Jews but embraces 
all the relations, all the labors, all the peculiarities, and all the 
experiences of the Jewish people.”’ (164) 


[PETITION TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION, CHICAGO.| Chicago 
Times, November 23, 1881. Abstract in Chicago Trib- 
une, November 23, 1881. 

A plea for instruction in non-sectarian ethics in all grades of 
the public schools. Includes suggestions for a graded course. 
For the most part identical with a passage in No. 94. Signed 
by a number of citizens, including ministers of several denomi- 
nations. (165) 


SITTENLEHRE IN DEN VOLKSSCHULEN. Illinois Staats- 
zettung, December 3, 1881. 

A letter written in reply to an editorial in the previous issue 
in which doubt was expressed as to the efficacy of the plan for 
ethical instruction submitted to the Board of Education by B. F. 
and other petitioners. Cf. No. 165. (166) 


1882 


UNSECTARIAN ETHICS IN OUR PUBLIC ScHOOLS. Nation, 
34°34.) aADUaLY oro, 91502. 

A letter to the editor. Similar in content to No. 165. 

(167) 
[RELIGIONS AND RELIGIOUS PEOPLES ComPARED.] Ms. 
1882. 9 pp. 

An address delivered January 28, 1882. The statement is 
made that “‘our religion is the best religion upon earth, but we 
Israelites, taken as one community, are not the most religious 
people upon earth.”’ (168) 


i 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 321 


Review oF G. S. Ensel’s Ancient Liturgical Music. Zett- 
geist, 3:56, February 16, 1882. 
Unsigned. (169) 


[REMINISCENCES FROM My CuiitpHoop.| Ms. 1882. 9 pp. 
Address delivered before the Peerless Society (a boys’ club), 
Chicago, February 19, 1882. (170) 


REVIEW OF “ Ein Bandchen Poesieen,”’ by M. Kohn-Bistritz 
and 8. Heller. Zeztgezst, 3:109, March 30, 1882. 
Unsigned. A sympathetic brief review. (70) 


PROFESSOR DELITZSCH UBER INTERCONFESSIONELLES VER- 
AEE Nem, CILOC1S| wai Oa oye 5202 we ADI Ue Ze Vay 
PD LOS2. 

A reply to the brochure of Professor Delitzsch, Christenthum 
und jiidische Presse, in which the author had complained of the 
views expressed by Jews in regard to Jesus, and in which he had 
alluded to the article by B. F., “‘Professor Delitzsch iiber inter- 
confessionelles Verhalten” (No. 161). The originality of Jesus 
is discussed from the Jewish point of view, the right to free expres- 
sion of opinion on this and similar topics is defended emphatically 
and at some length, and Delitzsch’s attitude is characterized, in 
the light of his own missionary activities among Jews, as incon- 
sistent. Finally are set down the occasions when religious po- 
lemic is justifiable. (172) 


Das NEUE TESTAMENT IN HEBRAISCHEM GEWANDE. (Re- 
view of F. Delitzsch’s translation of the New Testa- 
ment.) Zeitgeist, 3:165, May 25, 1882. Second half 
in English, with title, Tak NEw TESTAMENT IN HEBREW 
Dress, in Hebrew Student, 1:69, July, 1882. 

B. F. sees in this translation “nothing else than a missionary 
document” aimed at the Jews of Poland and adjacent countries, 
basing this judgment on the fact that, the New Testament having 
been originally written in Greek, no scientific purpose is accom- 
plished by its translation into Hebrew. ‘The translation as such 
is found to be excellent, though exception is taken to the choice 
of Hebrew words in certain important instances. ‘The portion 


322 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


of the article which appeared in the Hebrew Student included only 
the discussion of the translation from the point of view of lan- 
guage. (173) 

TOTAL ABSTINENCE AND THE BIBLE. Maccabaean, 1:321- 
29, June, 1882. 

Purports to be “extracts from a correspondence between a 
minister of the gospel and a teacher of Judaism.” Brings 
together the substance of a published sermon by the Rev. S. M. 
McChesney (cf. No. 86) and B. F.’s two previous articles, ‘‘The 
‘Wine’ of the Bible” (No. 85), and ‘“‘The Bible and Wine” (No. 
86). (174) 

MARRIAGE BETWEEN UNCLE AND NIEcE. Chicago Legal 
News, 14:327-28, June 17, 1882. Same in American 
Hebrew, 12:58, September 13, 1882. 

A letter to Mr. Adolph Moses of Chicago. Shows that marriage 
between uncle and niece was permitted under Mosaic law while 
marriage between aunt and nephew was prohibited. Summarizes 
the views held on the matter by Talmudists and jurists of later 
times, and refers to Roman and English ecclesiastical law on the 
subject. (175) 


REVIEW OF L. Stein’s Der geklarite Judenspiegel. Zur ge- 
treuen Darstellung des jiidischen Wesens und Lebens. 
Zerigerst, Bv201 ns] Une 22682, 

(176) 

[LETTER] TO THE VOTERS IN THE FOURTH SENATORIAL DIS- 
TRIcT. Chicago Tribune, September 23, 1882. 

B. F. announces himself as a candidate for the state legislature 
and gives his views on prohibition, Sunday laws, and the folly 
of voting for local officials on the basis of their party affiliations. 
His candidacy was not intended to be taken seriously. (177) 


REVIEWS OF J. S. Bloch’s Hellenistische Bestandthetile 1m bib- 
lischen Schriftthum, and Emma Lazarus’s Songs of a 
Semite. The Dance to Death, and Other Poems. Zeitt- 
geisil 2381s, ,Octobercr2:e1532 

The second review relates briefly the historical episode which 
is the basis for “‘The Dance to Death.” (178) 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 323 


REVIEW OF Jerusalem. Jahrbuch zur Beforderung einer ge- 
nauen Kenniniss Paldstinas. Herausgegeben von A. M. 
Luncz. Erster Jahrgang. Zevigeist, 3:328-29, October 
26, 1882. 

(179) 

REVIEWS OF L. Stein’s Gebetbuch fiir israelitische Gemeinden, 
and J. S. Bloch’s Der Arbeiterstand bet den Paldstinen- 
sern, Griechen, und Rimern. Zeitgeist, 3:345, Novem- 
ber 9, 1882. 

The first of the two reviews contains observations on Jewish 
religious conditions in Germany and the difficulty of instituting 
reforms there. (180) 


First HEBREW Books. Hebrew Student, 2:111-12, Decem- 
ber, 1882. | 

Brief notes about early printing establishments in Italy and 

Spain. Gives a partial list of Hebrew incunabula, including 
only Biblical books and Biblical commentaries, 1475-94. 

(181) 

GABRIEL RresserR. Ms. 1882. 11 pp. | 

In German. An address delivered before Ramah Lodge, 

Chicago, December 6, 1882. (182) 


1883 


[JUDAISM AND OTHER REticions. A Comparison.] Ms. 
To 28( 2 Nilo: DD: 
Address before Zion Literary Association. Maintains that the 
fundamental principles of Judaism are identical with natural 
religion. (183) 


THE ETERNAL AND THE TRANSIENT ELEMENTS IN JUDAISM. 
VEStee O93. 7 DD; 

A lecture delivered before Zion Literary Association, April 27, 

1883. On the comparative importance of the faith of Judaism 

and the ceremonies of Judaism. ‘The historical value of the 

traditional ceremonies in preserving Israel as a distinct people is 

acknowledged. (184) 


324 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


ON THE LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE OF THE JEWS IN THE 
TIMES OF JESUS AND THE APOSTLES. Ms. 1883. 22 pp. 

A lecture delivered before the Hebrew Summer School, Morgan 

Park, Ill., July 18, 1883. Deals chiefly with language. A 
second manuscript, with substantially the same title, written 
August, 1882, discusses more fully the character and value of 
Jewish post-Biblical literature, and includes bibliographical 
matter. (185) 


THE RECENT CINCINNATI COUNCIL. Occident, I1, no. 14, 
July 20, 1883. 

An informal account of the meeting of the Union of American 

Hebrew Congregations. Discusses the career of Rabbi Isaac 

M. Wise, Hebrew Union College, and touches on the dangers of 

ecclesiastical centralization. Among other possible future acts 

of a central body, warns that “‘some fine day a Council, or a 

Synod, or a Committee, by virtue of their assumed ecclesiastical 

authority, might officially declare that America is our promised 

land and that Washington was our Messiah.” (186) 


1884 


THE LAW OF RELEASE AS UNDERSTOOD AND PRACTICED IN 
THE APOSTOLIC AGE. Old Testament Student, 3:145-40, 
January, 1884. 

Describes the gradual change under more complex social con- 
ditions in interpretation of the law according to which debts 
were annulled at the Sabbatical year (Deut. 15:1, 2). Repro- 
duces the legal form (Prosbul), and illustrates the legal procedure 
in general by a description of a scene from a Jewish court in a 
Galilean city. (187) 


NOTES ON THE HISTORY OF THE JEWS IN ENGLAND AND THE 
AMERICAN COLONIES. Jewish Messenger, 55, no. 1:5, 
January 4, 1884. Same in C. P. Daly, The Settlement 
of the Jews in North America (New York, 1893), pp. 
155-560. Same in American Hebrew, 53:208-9, June 
EOMEOO SE 

Correspondence between B. F. and Judge Charles P. Daly, of 
New York, dealing with the civil rights of the Jews in England 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 325 


and in the American colonies during the eighteenth century. 
The letter of B. F. refers chiefly to exclusion of Jews in the colo- 
nies from holding state offices. (188) 


ANTI-JEWISH PREJUDICES AND THEIR Sources. Chicago 
Inter-Ocean, April 27, 1884. 

An address delivered before Zion Literary Association, March 
29, 1884. ‘The causes are found to be threefold—religious 
intolerance, racial antipathy, and complete ignorance concern- 
ing the religion, history, customs, and achievements of the Jews. 
B. F. is hopeful in regard to the first, believing that fanaticism 
is rapidly dying out in America; as regards the second, ‘‘no man 
of sound moral principles will judge an individual by national 
characteristics. What the Jews have to do under the circum- 
stances is to labor conscientiously and constantly on [their] own 
self-improvement.” As to the third cause, ‘“‘What once has been 
written down by pens steeped in venom is now, without further 
examination, accepted as indisputable truth. Poisonous seed is 
implanted into the hearts of ignorant and unthinking masses. 
What wonder if poisonous plants grow up!”’ (189) 


ON “INTERMEDIATE SYLLABLES.” Hebraica, 1:60-65, May, 
1884. 
Discusses syllabification and other subjects in Hebrew phonol- 
ogy. (190) 
*LEOPOLD ZuNz. [Chicago: TJilinois Staatszeitung, 1884.| 
3 pp. 4to. Reprinted from Jllinois Staatszeitung, Aug- 
ust 8, 1884. Same in Jewish Herald, August 15, 1884. 
Written on the occasion of Zunz’s ninetieth birthday. Dis- 
cusses his importance as the founder of Jewish science, and 
pays tribute to his profound scholarship, his thorough under- 
standing of modern problems, and his possession of the true 
humanistic spirit. (191) 


MONTEFIORE-FEIER. REDE. Der Westen, October 26, 1884. 
Same in Deborah, 28, no. 19:5-6, November 7, 1884. 
Address delivered at the celebration of the one hundredth 
birthday of Montefiore, Zion Temple, Chicago, October 25, 1884. 
‘And all this was done by him, the conservative Jewish English- 
man! And thereby proof has been given that even the most 


326 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


orthodox Judaism and genuine humanitarianism do not exclude 
each other; on the contrary, that Judaism furthers humanita- 
rianism and leads to it.”’ (192) 


BIBLE INTERPRETATION; How and How Not. Old Testa- 
ment Student, 4:114-19, November, 1884. (Reprinted 
in this volume.) 

A lecture delivered before the Hebrew Summer School at 
Morgan Park, Ill., July 7, 1884. An answer to the question, 
“Ts not the exegesis of the Scriptures to be taught differently 
in separate denominational seminaries?” ‘“‘No. From _ the 
professor’s chair the Bible must be explained and studied without 
any doctrinal or sectarian bias. . . . Truth, nothing but the 
truth, should be the aim [of the Bible scholar].”’ Lllustrations 
are given of Biblical interpretations by Mohammedans, Jews, 
and Christians, colored by such bias. (193) 


‘“GAMALIEL BEN PEDAHZzUR.” FERMENTED OR UNFER- 
MENTED WINE? Old Testament Student, 4:131-32, 
November, 1884. 

Refers to a statement in the Book of Religion, Ceremonies, and 
Prayers of the Jews, by Gamaliel ben Pedahzur, London, 1738. 
“Neither Jewish life nor Jewish law knew anything of the theory 
of total abstinence.” | (194) 


1885 


ADDITIONAL ARAMAIC WoRDS IN THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
Hebraica, 1:188-89, January, 1885. 
Supplements ‘‘The Aramaic Language”’ (Hebraica, 1:98-115), 
translated by Charles R. Brown from Kautzsch’s Grammattk des 
Biblisch-Aramiischen. (195) 


REVIEW OF M. Mielziner’s The Jewish Law of Marriage and 
Divorce. Old Testament Student, 4:234-36, January, 
1885. (196) 

REVIEW OF Berthold Auerbach’s Briefe an seinen Freund 
Jakob Auerbach. Der Westen, August 2, 1885. 

Great admiration is expressed for the character of Auerbach 
as displayed in “this excellent, this refreshing book.” The 


EE ee ee ee 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ao 


review includes a discussion of Auerbach in his relation to the 
anti-Semitic agitation in Germany. (197) 


1886 


AUS DER CHICAGOER SINAI-GEMEINDE. Jewish Reformer, 
-I, no. 4:13, January 22, 18386. 

In reference to criticism of Sinai Congregation for declining 
to take part in a synod or to join a union of congregations, it 
is shown that the congregation has remained faithful to the prin- 
ciples adopted at the beginning of its history. Resolutions dated 
1859, bearing on the autonomy of individual congregations and 
on the religious independence of individual members are quoted. 
Ci, No. 277. (198) 


ZUR GESCHICHTE DES NAMENS SCHLEMIHL. Jewish Re- 
former, I, no. 4:12, January 22, 1886. 

Notes on the history of the name Schlemihl, or Schlumiel. 
Discusses also what historic character is immortalized by the 
proverbial use of the word, its rarity as an actual given name 
even in former times, etc. “And if the name Schlumiel should 
drop entirely out of usage, we may nevertheless comfort our- 
selves. The race of Schlemihlim is in no danger of dying out.” 
Supplements an article by K. Kohler in Jewish Reformer, 1, no. 
1:14, January 1, 1886. (199) 


REVIEW OF Studia Biblica. Essays on Biblical Archaeology 
and Criticism and Kindred Subjects. By members of 
the University of Oxford. Jewish Reformer, 1, no. 5:5, 
January 20, 1886. 


(200) 


AN DIE REDAKTION. Jewish Reformer, 1, no. 12:13, March 
19, 1886. 

Refers to article ‘‘Pesach-Wein aus Jerusalem!’ (Jewish 

Reformer, 1, no. 11:13) which, with humorous intent, connects 

B. F. with ceremonies at the custom house. (See also “Our 

Chicago Letter,” signed “Radical,” in Jewish Reformer, 1, no. 

Tt On) (201) 


328 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


ANDENKEN AN Moses RvuBEL. Deborah, 29, no. 39:6, 
March 26, 1886. 


A funeral address. (202) 


PROSELYTES, CONFERENCES, REFORM, ETC. Jewish Mes- 
senger, 59, no. 15:5, April 9, 1886. 

B. F. repeats briefly his views as to the acceptance of proselytes 

(cf. No. 112), but declares that no rabbi can ‘“‘accept”’ proselytes, 

being without authority, and rightly so. Conferences, likewise, 

are without authority, nor are they needed for the furtherance of 

religious reform. (203) 


REDE. Jewish, Reformer; 1, 10.422 11-12; NO. \2eenaees 
May 28—June 4, 1886. 

Address delivered in Sinai Temple, Chicago, on May 16, 1886, 
the twenty-fifth anniversary of the founding of the congregation. 
Describes the religious situation in American Judaism at the time 
of the founding of the congregation and reviews the aims of the 
founders, B. F. being its first rabbi. Holds that Reform Judaism 
has accomplished its purpose in bringing about an increase of 
zeal for Judaism, and closes with a statement of those profounder 
religious problems which in these later times have presented 
themselves to the attention of the Jewish people. (204) 


A LETTER FROM DR. FELSENTHAL. Occident, 14, no. 8, 
June 4, 1886. 

Corrects a misstatement in the previous issue in regard to his 

attitude toward the Bible. (205) 


REVIEW OF B. Szold’s The Book of Job, with a New Commen- 
tary. Hebraica, 2:254, July, 1886. 
(206) 


UEBER PROSELYTENAUFNAHME. Deborah, 30, no. 4:5, July 
23, 1886. 

On the universal character of the Jewish religion and on 
liberal opinions of the present time as to the requirements 
for proselytes. Quotes in translation a passage from Schorr, 
He-’Haluz, XI, 72, deploring the fact that the entrance of prose- 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 329 


lytes into Judaism had been made difficult from early times. 
The synod as authority in Jewish problems is emphatically 
rejected. (207) 


EIN KLEINER BEITRAG ZUR CULTURGESCHICHTE. Illinois 
Staatszeitung, August 20, 1886. 

Concerning the translation into Hebrew by the Jewish scholar 
Abraham Shalom of one of the works of Marsilius of Inghen, 
and of other evidences that the Jews during the Middle Ages, 
contrary to the usual belief, interested themselves in European 
culture. (208) 


AN ETHICAL PROBLEM. WNation, 43:433, November 25, 
1886. 

The problem raised is whether, in cases of extreme physical 
suffering, when death is certain, it ‘‘be not permissible to the 
attending physician, aye, would not be his duty, to ease the 
sufferer’s last moments, by applying a drop of strong poison, or 
a spark of electricity, or any other method whereby . . . death 
would be accelerated.” (209) 


1887 


MYRTHENSTRAUSS UND GEWURZBEET. ERZAHLUNGEN AUS 
DEM LEBEN DES EDLEN MENSCHENFREUNDES MOSES 
MoNTEFIORE. Von Abraham Schaffner. Aus dem 
hebrdischen Original-Manuscript in’s Deutsche tiber- 
tragen [von B. Felsenthal]. New York: Sarasohn and 
Son, 1887. 96 pp. rI2mo. 

The volume contains Hebrew text and German and English 
translations. Includes two letters in Hebrew from B. F. to the 
author. (210) 


Literary MIscELLANtES. Menorah M onthly, 2:262-65 
(I-III), 289-94 (IV-VII); 3:29-32 (VIII-X]I), 107-12 
(XII-XIV), 240-43 (XV—XVII), May—October, 1887. 


Informal causeries. 


I. A New Hesrew Dictionary. (Ha-Ozar, by S. J. Fuenn.) 
Calls attention to the unique character of the work, in that it 


330 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


includes not only the words of the Bible, but post-Biblical 
Hebrew also. 

II. HeBrREw Works PUBLISHED BY THE “‘ MEKITZE NIRDA- 
MIM’? IN 1886. Notice of books published in the second annual 
series, with information about the society. 

UI. A New “Zeitscurirt.” <A few words of recommenda- 
tion for the Zeitschrift fiir die Geschichte der Juden in Deutschland, 
edited by L. Geiger. 


ITV. CHRONOLOGICAL DATES IN HEBREW LITERATURE. 


) 


VenLOEB Ss 4LABLES “smeTC: 


VI. WHEN COMMENCES JEWISH CHRONOLOGY TO BECOME 
EXACT ? 


VII. Is SHeREIRA GAON TRUSTWORTHY ? 

IV-VII constitute a review of Isidor Loeb’s Tables du calen- 
drier juif, with discussion of certain points in Jewish chronology. 

VIII. A Query. ‘Was THERE EVER A Two-YEAR CYCLE 
OF THE READING OF THE TORAH IN USE IN THE SYNAGOGUE ?”’ 
Suggested by an assertion in Zunz, Die Ritus, that there was such 
a cycle. 

IX. “Ir Is Toran.” On “the duty of the Jew to acquire 
some knowledge of Jewish history, as also the principal points of 
the doctrines, the laws and the institutions of Judaism.” 

X. A WorD IN BEHALF OF THE ‘‘ MENORAH MONTHLY.”’ 

XI. WuHo Was ’Hayyim Kim’H1? Relates as an example for 
imitation an instance of ’Hayyim Kim’hi’s generosity in having 
a valuable Ms. published and distributed at his own expense. 

XI. Tor Two-YEAR CyCLe AND ZuUNz’s AUTHORITY FOR It. 

XIII. Was A BIENNIAL CYCLE EVER IN USE? 

XJI-XIII discuss the point raised in No. VIII, B. F.’s opinion 
being that such a cycle was never in use. 

XIV. DIvisIoN OF THE PENTATEUCH AND SELECTION OF 
HAPHTAROTH. Discussion of the date when the final division 
of the Pentateuch into sidroth took place, and of other topics 
connected with the reading of the Torah and Haphtaroth. 

XV-XVI. Review oF O.H. Schorr’s He-’Haluz, XII. ‘One 
can learn something from this Galician savant—a savant who, 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Rat 


by-the-by, is not a ‘Rabbi,’ nor a ‘doctor,’ nor a ‘reverend,’ 
but he is more; he is—O. H. Schorr.” 

XVII. LEARN, But Do Not Dream! On study and more 
study and still more study; in particular on the necessity of a 
good foundation of knowledge as a qualification for the rabbinate. 

(211) 
REVIEW OF S. J. Fuenn’s New Hebrew Dictionary. Hebraica, 
Bee 5 500m ye noo 7. 

The broad scope of the work is here again emphasized (cf. No. 
211, I), and post-Biblical Hebrew is discussed, with illustrations 
of the fact that the Bible does not by any means include all the 
words in the language. (212) 


Two EPIGRAMS BY ABRAHAM [BN Ezra. Menorah Monthly, 
3:96, August, 1887. 

Translated into English verse by B. F. Hebrew text is also 

given. (213) 


Was Ist JUDENTHUM? Menorah Monthly, 3:259-68, Octo- 
ber, 1887. Same, translated by H. Eliassof, with title, 
WHaT Is JupAIsmM? Menorah Monthly, - 3:364-70, 
November, 1887. | 

An address delivered in Zion Temple, August 27,1887. Rejects 
various definitions as inadequate, and emphasizes freedom of 
religious opinion as essential to Judaism. For B. F.’s own 
definition, see p. 232, this volume. (214) 


REVIEW OF Catalogue of the Hebrew Library of Joshua I. 
Cohen of Baltimore. Compiled by Cyrus Adler. Jew- 

ish Exponent, 2, no. 3:5, October 28, 1887. 
The accuracy of the catalogue is noted, and the value of the 
library is discussed, special mention being made of two rare 
books contained therein. (215) 


1888 


Am SYLVESTERABEND. Jhe New Year, January 1, 1888. 
The New Year was a four-page paper published by Mr. Henry 
Greenebaum for a meeting of friends at his residence on 
New Year’s Eve, 1887-88, its contents being made up entirely 


332 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


of contributions from those present. “Am Sylvesterabend”’ is 
a semi-serious article in which, among other matters, the political 
aspects of the past year are touched upon, and contrast is drawn 
between German and Anglo-Saxon ideas of liberty, highly favor- 
able to the latter. (216) 


Dr. KRAUSKOPF AS AN HISTORIAN. (Review of Joseph 
Krauskopf’s Half a Century of Judaism im the United 
States, in American Jews’ Annual for 5648, pp. 65-95.) 
Occident, 15, no. 43, February 3, 1888. 

Unfavorable. Review brings out the facts in connection with 
the Rabbinical Conferences of 1869 and 1870. (217) 


How Otp Is JeHovaH? Menorah Monthly, 4:355-58, 
April, 1888. 

Signed ‘“Ploni Almoni.”’ On the use of the word Jehovah. 

(218) 


How Otp Is “Lrexwan Doni’? Menorah Monthly, 5:38- 
46, July, 1888. 

A conversation with a mythical friend Raphael on the author- 
ship and history of the hymn. A passage (which may be auto- 
biographical) describes Sabbath eve in the synagogue of Raphael’s 
childhood. ‘The subject of Jewish mysticism is touched upon. 

(219) 
[To THE Eprtor.| Der Jiidischer Courier, October 12, 1888. 


In Hebrew and German. Appeals for support of Moses 
Montefiore Hebrew School. Urges Russian and Polish Jewish 
immigrants to learn English in public evening schools, and 
strongly advises against the use of Yiddish. (220) 


1889 


[SAMUEL Hirscu.] GEDACHTNISSREDE. In In Memory of 
Dr. Samuel Hirsch (Chicago, 1889), pp. 23-27. 

Address delivered at memorial service, Chicago, May 19, 1889. 

A eulogy, emphasizing particularly the significance and value of 

Hirsch’s writings. (221) 


at La on a 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 333 


RaBBI Patrick. Menorah Monthly, 6:19-29, January 1, 
1889. (Reprinted in this volume.) 

A series of proofs that the names, "D""7USN "PUD PVs 
"P"ADEN occurring in Talmudic literature corresponded with 
Patrick, the fact being used to illustrate the historic significance 
ofnames. The article is in part a defense of scholarly minuteness 
(Notizkrémeret), with illustrations of the important conclusions 
to which such minuteness may lead. (222) 


[To THE Epitor.] Keren Or, 1, no. 1:10, April, 1889. 

In Hebrew. In reply to request to become a contributor, 
discusses the character of this new Hebrew magazine. Advises 
its readers, newcomers in America from Russia, Poland, and 
Galicia, on general conditions of life in ‘“‘this blessed land,” and 
suggests that many enter the trades, and particularly that many 
leave the crowded cities and join agricultural colonies. (223) 


Fas ssa matin Keren Or, 1, no. 2:7—-9, July, 1880. 

Comment on a rare and valuable book by David Nasi, “written 
to show that the Gospels give evidence of the truth of Judaism.” 
As regards its date, B. F. gives facts to prove that it could not 
have been written long before 1600, though the date in the printed 
copy is 1430. The book is partly reprinted in this number, and 
the intention was to continue, but the magazine ceased publica- 
tion. (224) 


pasa mS wenwn = =6Der Jiidischer Courier, November 8, 
1889. 

In German, with Hebrew characters. Addressed to the resi- 

dents of the Russian and Polish section of the city. Friendly 

advice on giving and asking charity. (225) 


A Few Worps CONCERNING FUNERALS. American Hebrew, 
41:95, November 29, 1889. 

Advocates “‘a reform backward”’ to the simple funeral customs 

of a former time. - (226) 


BIBLICAL History IN OuR SABBATH ScHOOLS. Menorah 
Monthly, 7:330-36, December, 18809. 

“Extracts from a letter to a friend.” Footnote. On methods 

of instruction, particularly on the importance of proper selection 


334 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


and order of material to be presented. Advocates the post- 
ponement of “difficult cosmogonies”’ to the higher classes, the 
omission of certain parts of the Bible, as miracle stories, and lays 
special stress on the selection of those parts “‘which convey great 
moral and religious lessons, which are apt to influence and shape 
our inner life for the better.’’ Post-Biblical stories and sayings 
should find their place. Based on No. 149. (227) 


1890 


Wuy IsRAELITES Do Not Accept JESUS AS THEIR MESSIAH. 
In Jew and Gentile. A Report of a Conference of Israel- 
ites and Christians (Chicago [1890]), pp. 14-109. 

*Wuy Do THE JEws Not Accept JESUS AS THEIR MESSIAH ? 
(Reform Advocate Library, No. 6.) Chicago: Bloch 
and Newman, n.d. 30 pp. 1r6mo. Reprinted from 
Reform Advocate, 7: 391-93, 403-5, July 14-21, 1894. 

A frank discussion before a mixed audience of the main ortho- 
dox Christian doctrines. Incidentally B. F. expresses himself as 
out of sympathy with ‘‘conferences in which articles of faith are 
discussed by confessors of different religious systems.” (228) 


WHat Is It To BEA JEw? Jewish Messenger, 67, no. 1:5, 
January 3, 1890. 

Contributed toasymposium. The question considered histori- 
cally and from the point of view of modern life. It is maintained 
that birth and not doctrinal conformity is the criterion of Jewish- 
ness. (229) 


Wuo Isa JEw? Menorah Monthly, 8:296-304, June, 1890. 
Cf. No. 229. The same thesis is here.developed at greater 
length. (230) 


AN APPEAL. WHO oF You WILL SUBSCRIBE TO THE COL- 
LECTED WORKS OF SAADYAH GAON? Jewish Voice, 9, 
no. I, July -, 1890. Same, with title, WORKS OF SAA- 
DYAH GAON, in Menorah Monthly, 9:180, September, 
1890. 

Describes the project initiated by eminent Jewish scholars 
to publish the works of Saadyah Gaon on the roooth anniversary 
of his birth in 1892. (231) 





ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 335 


WHo WaAs SAADYAH GAON? Jewish Voice, 9, no. 1, July -, 
1890. 

Brief sketch bringing out the unique position occupied by 

Saadyah Gaon in the history of Jewish literature. (232) 


SOME QUESTIONS OF THE DAy. 1. ADMITTANCE OF PROSE- 
LYTES. 2. THE RABBI AND His TRUE POSITION. 3. 
CONFERENCES; How anp How Not. AN OPEN ANSWER 
TO AN OPEN LETTER. Menorah Monthly, 9:206-17, 
October, 1890. Same, with title, RESPONSE oF Dr. B. 
FELSENTHAL, In Central Conference of American Rabbis. 
Yearbook, 1S9r. 2:86-95. An extract reprinted as 
part of a symposium on proselytism in Jewish Voice, 
October —, 1890. 

A reponse to an “‘open letter to the rabbis of the United States 
of America”? from Rabbi Henry Berkowitz, requesting opinions 
on the subject of Milath Guerim, this letter having appeared in 
various Jewish weeklies ca. August 1, 1890. Similar in content 
to “Proselytes, Conferences, Reform, etc.’’ (No. 203), but 
longer and more emphatic. The passage republished in Jewish 
Voice deals chiefly with authority in Judaism, and with reform 
of religious customs by gradual natural changes in practice. 

(233) 


On AutHoritry IN Jupaism. Jewish Exponent, 8, no. 4:5, 
October 31, 1890. 

An answer to the editorial comment in Jewish Exponent, 

October 17, 1890, on No. 233. B. F. here corrects a misunder- 

standing of his position on the synod question. (234) 


PROSELYTISM WITHOUT PERITOMY. Jewish Exponent, 8, no. 
6:5, November 14, 1890. 

An outline of the history of the question from the time of the 
prophets to the present, with a restatement of B. F.’s own atti- 
tude. “History has taught me that the law of evolution [has] 
made itself perceptible in Judaism as well as in other fields, and 
that under the stern rule of this law not only post-Talmudical 
and Talmudical enactments, but also Biblical commandments 
have sunk into total neglect and oblivion. . . . So, I think, the 


336 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


ancient laws concerning the admission of proselytes may also 
undergo a change, if rational reasons demand such a change.” 
(235) 
1891 


THE PALESTINE MEmorIAL. Reform Advocate, 1:80, March 
ZO ELOO ke 

In favor of colonization in Palestine. Occasioned by the 

presentation to President Harrison of a petition asking that an 

international conference be called to consider the return of 

Palestine to the Jews. (236) 


SAMUEL ADLER. New Yorker Staatszeitung, June 21, 1801. 
Partly reprinted in Illinois Staatszeitung, June 30, 1801. 
Biographical sketch, with emphasis on Adler’s personality 
and influence, and his progressive attitude in the Reform move- 
ment. ‘‘Adler belonged to the progressives. But he did not 
rush heedlessly forward. He was a truly wise man, and therefore 
cautious, and this made his work all the more successful.” 
(237) 
[To THE Eprtor.| Ha-Pisgah, 3, no. 27:2, November 6, 1891. 
In Hebrew. Discusses the future of Hebrew as a living lan- 
guage, and expresses the opinion that its revival is possible in 
Eastern Europe and the Orient. Regarding colonization, B. F. 
would prefer Palestine to Argentina, and he rejoices over the 
revival of nationalism among the Jews. (238) 


1892 


DIE GREULICHE LUGE voM CHRISTENKINDERSCHLACHTEN 
DER JUDEN. Jllinois Staatszeitung, January 30, 1892. 
Outlines the history of Jewish persecution, especially with 
reference to the accusation of ritual murder, and to the anti- 
Semitic agitation in Germany at that date. (239) 


*“LIEBMANN ADLER. EINE GEDENKREDE. Chicago, 1892. 
14 pp. r2mo. Reprinted from Reform Advocate, 3:92- 

93, March 5, 1802. 
Adler was rabbi of Kehillath Anshe Maarabh, Chicago, and an 
intimate friend of B. F. This eulogy, delivered at the memorial 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 337 


service at K.A.M. Temple, February 14, 1892, sketches his life 
and character, and describes his influence. His religious stand- 
point, that of conservative Reform, is indicated in these words: 
““He was in favor of gradual and peaceful evolution, and looked 
with disfavor upon the methods of violent and hasty revolution.” 


(240) 

REVIEW oF Alexander Kohut’s ’Arukh Completum. Hebra- 
ica, 9:125-28, October, 1892—January, 1893. 

(241) 


1893 


ON CREMATION FROM THE JEWISH STANDPOINT. Central 
Conference of American Rabbis. Yearbook, 1893. 3:53- 
68. 

An opinion submitted as a member of a committee appointed 
to report “‘whether or not cremation were in accord with the 
spirit of Judaism.”” Conclusion is that cremation is neither irre- 
ligious nor anti-Jewish, though never a Jewish custom. The 
“spirit of Judaism”’ is called “‘an elastic term.”’ (242) 


[MauricE Mayer.| Chicago Inter-Ocean, February 24, 
1893. Same in Menorah Monthly, 14:265-69, April, 
1893. 

Address delivered at the celebration of the twenty-fifth anni- 
versary of the founding of Maurice Mayer Lodge (I.0.B.B), 
Chicago, February 23, 1893. Cf. No. 35. (243) 


THE PALESTINE QUESTION. Jewish Voice, 14, no. 15:5-6, 
April 14, 1893. 

“What shall it be? Restoration? Or Colonization? Or 
neither the one nor the other? What shall it be?” Swb-tztle. 
Opposes the establishment of colonies in the Argentine, and favors 
colonization in Palestine, mainly for the reason that the senti- 
ment of the vast majority of the Jewish people clings to Palestine. 
Distinguishes between restoration and colonization. ‘Touches 
on the relation between the Reform movement and Zionism. 


(244) 


338 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


[oyat"2 “x°p] Ha-Lbri, 3, no. 18:4, May 7, 1893. 
Brief history and description of the work of the publishing 
society, Mekize Nirdamim, and an appeal to subscribe. 
(245) 
On INSTRUCTION IN THE Post-BIBLICAL HISTORY OF THE 
Jews ESPECIALLY, AND ON SABBATH SCHOOL INSTRUC- 
TION IN GENERAL. In Guide for Jewish Sabbath School 
Teachers (Cincinnati, n. d.), pp. 70-80. 
A paper read before the Jewish Congress, August 29, 1893. 
Deals chiefly with the subject matter of instruction in Jewish 
history, religion, and ethics. (246) 


[EL1as GRUNEBAUM.| NaAcuRuF. Illinois Staatszeitung, Sep- 
tember 30, 1893. 

Sketches appreciatively the activities of this rabbi of Landau. 

(247) 


1894 


THE SABBATH IN JUDAISM. Menorah Monthly, 15:233-40, 
October, 1893. Same in Reform Advocate, 6:125-27, 
October 7, 1893. Same in Judaism ai the World’s Par- 
liament of Religions (Cincinnati, 1894), pp. 35-41. 
Same in The Sunday Problem (Boston, 1894), pp. 266-75. 

A paper read before the International Congress on Sabbath 
Rest, Chicago, September, 1893. Traces the history of the Sab- 
bath among the Jews, its influence on their history and develop- 
ment, and concludes with remarks on what constitutes proper 
Sabbath legislation. (248) 


*ON THE HISTORY OF THE JEWS OF CHICAGO.—THE JEWISH 
CONGREGATION IN SURINAM.—A SERMON BY MOSES 
MENDELSSOHN. Baltimore: The Friedenwald Com- 
pany, 1894. Pp. 21-32. 8vo. Reprinted from Ameri- 
can Jewish Historical Society. Publications. No. 2,1894. 

(1) Notes about early Jewish residents and the main facts as 
to congregational history. Based on No. 134. (2) Data about 
“‘one of the oldest, if not the oldest”? congregation in America; 
also facts concerning David Pardo, rabbi in Surinam, ca. 1686- 
1715. (3) A sermon printed in Philadelphia, 1763, and dis- 





ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 339 


covered by Professor Morris Jastrow in the library of the Library 
Company of Philadelphia is described as a translation from the 
German original of Mendelssohn, written after the victory of 
Frederick the Great over the Austrian forces in the Battle of 
Leuthen, December 5, 1757. (249) 


AUS EINEM BRIEFE AN Dr. G. DEUTSCH. 1. KIMCHI ODER 
Kamcat. 2. £7072 Deborah, 39, no. 31:6, February 1, 
1894. 

t. On the correct pronunciation of thename. 2. On the inter- 
pretation of the word Mesarefin Amos 6:10. Cf. No. 267. 

(250) 

REVIEW OF Michael Heilprin’s Bibelkritische Notizen. Ein 
nachgelassenes Manuscript. Reform Advocate, 7:361, 
June 30, 1804. 

(251) 

AMERIKANISCHES JUDENTHUM. Deborah, 40, no. 1:16-17, 
July 5, 1894. 

Answering the frequent complaint of German writers that 
American materialism was influencing Germany, B. F. asserts 
emphatically that America is the more idealistic of the two 
countries. ‘‘In this country, also, there are inspired prophets 
of idealism; idealism is here a mighty power, and very great 
sacrifices are made for idealistic causes. Men give with truly 
princely generosity. Princely generosity, did I say? I amend 
the expression: with truly republican generosity.” As regards 
religion, it would be highly desirable for European Judaism to 
become Americanized, i.e., be separated from the state, and its 
individual members be free as individuals to believe and worship 
as they pleased. The American spirit in religious matters is one 
of mutual tolerance. (252) 


Review oF M. Mielziner’s Introduction to the Talmud. 
Reform Advocate, 7:406-7, July 21, 1894. 
(253) 
Day OF ATONEMENT OR DAy OF RECONCILIATION? Keform 
Advocate, 8:157, October 27, 1894. 
Expresses preference for the latter as the better name for the 
holy day. (254) 


340 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Wuat CAN BE DONE TO BRING NEW LIFE AND ENTHUSIASM 
INTO THE B’NAI B’RITH LODGES? Monitor, District 
No. 6, I.O.B.B., 1, no. 1:2—3, November 15, 1894. 

The answer here offered is, “Take up earnestly some good and 
noble work. Give the brethren something to do.’’ The work 
which the article particularly urges on the members of the lodges 
is aid to Russian Jewish refugees; it is advised that ‘‘numbers 
of them be brought under the influence of the B. B. order.” oe 

255 


1895 


CASUISTIC QUESTIONS, ASKED BY ISRAEL HONIGSBERG AND 
DECIDED BY RABBI EZEKIEL LANDAU. Jewish Voice, 
18, no. 5:4, February 1, 1895. 

Illustrations from the Noda’ 61-Yehudah, ‘‘a collection of 
Responses to religious questions submitted to the famous Rabbi 
of Prague in the second half of the last century.” “But a little © 
more than one hundred years have passed since the above 
She’eloth were submitted and the above Teshubhoth were rendered. ’ 
How have the times changed so thoroughly and so extraordinarily 
in this comparatively short period! Does it not seemas though 
the religious life of the Jews, as reflected in the Noda’ Bihudah, i 
and in the Hebrew literature of the eighteenth century generally, 
was that of a thousand years ago? Verily, fempora mutantur, 
et nos mutamur in illis.” (256) 


RODKINSON’S ‘‘NEW EDITION OF THE ORIGINAL BABYLO- 
NIAN TALMUD.” Reform Advocate, 9:187, May 11, 1895. 


(257) 

AN ADDITIONAL WoRD CONCERNING RODKINSON’S NEW 

TALMUD EpitTIon. Reform Advocate, 9:200, May 18, 

1895. 

(258) 

LETTER TO Mr. RODKINSON. American Israelite, 41, no. 

48:5, May 30, 1895. Same in Chicago Israelite, June 1, 
1895. 

Nos. 257—59 refer to the claim of Mr. M. L. Rodkinson that his 

edition of the Talmud restored it to its original form. Cf. No. 





ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 341 


260. This article also discusses briefly the characteristics of the 
Babylonian and Palestinian academies. (259) 


M. L. Ropxinson anp His Tarmup. (Review.) Reform 
Advocate, 10:473, 500, 514-15, 527-28, September 14— 
October 5, 1895. 


Severely critical. The work is called a falsification of the 
Talmud. (260) 


1896 

*CHRONOLOGICAL SKETCH OF THE HISTORY OF THE JEWS 
IN SURINAM. By B. Felsenthal and Richard Gottheil. 
Baltimore: The Friedenwald Company, 1895. Pp. 1-8. 
8vo. Reprinted from American Jewish Historical Soci- 

ety. Publications. No. 4, 1806. 
Expanded by Professor Gottheil from notes sent him by B. F. 
These notes were gathered from the catalogue of the library 
referred to in No. go. (261) 


THE JEWISH HOUSE A SANCTUARY OF THE LorD. In Ser- 
mons by American Rabbis (Chicago, 1896), pp. 360-70. 

On religion as the controlling power in daily life, and on the 

duties of the members of the family toward each other. Half 

the sermon is devoted to the treatment of servants. (262) 


*JUDISCHE FRAGEN. BEITRAGE ZUR KLARUNG DERSEL- 
BEN. Chicago: Koelling und Klappenbach, 1896. 40 
pp. 12mo. Contents: GiBT ES DOGMEN IM JUDEN- 
THUM? pp. 5-27; WO STEHEN WIR? pp. 29-40. 
The first of the two essays also in Central Conference 
of American Rabbis. Yearbook, 1897-98. 7: 54-73. 
The second essay is reprinted in translation in this vol- 
ume, with title, ‘“Where Do We Stand?” 

“Gibt es Dogmen im Judenthum?” was presented at the 
Central Conference of American Rabbis, Milwaukee, July 8, 
1896. Develops the thesis that there is in Judaism a history of 
dogma, but no fixed absolutedogmas. Traces historically several 
of the leading religious ideas, among these the unity of God, the 
nature of God, the immortality of the soul. 

“Wo stehen wir ?”’ an essay read before the Chicago Rabbinical 
Association, May 6, 1895, answers the question “Are we still 


342 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Jews?” on the basis of a broad definition of the Jewish 
religion. Maintains that this is not synonymous with Judaism 
in its larger sense, which is defined as “the sum total of all the 
psychological characteristics peculiar to the race of Israel.” The 
great Jewish problems of the time, of the continued existence 
of the Jews as a separate people, of national Judaism versus 
Judaism as a universal religion, are stated, and the two points of 
view are contrasted. ‘Touches on intermarriage in its relation to 
these larger problems, with quotations from Einhorn and Geiger. 

Reviewed by Paul Goodman in Jewish Quarterly Review, 10: 
194-96, October, 1897; in New York Sun, October 18, 1896; by 
W. B. in Zeitschrift fiir Hebraeische Bibliographie, 1:166, Novem- 
ber—December, 1896; in Illinois Staatszeitung, and in various 
other papers, e.g., Jewish Exponent, Deborah, American Hebrew, 
Jewish Ledger (New Orleans). Notice in Jewish Chronicle 
(London). (263) 


LETTER FROM RABBI FELSENTHAL. Chicago Tribune, Febru- 
ary 18, 1896. 

Disapproves of the proposed introduction of a “‘ Bible reader”’ 
into the Chicago public schools. “I venerate my sacred Scrip- 
tures as highly as anyone, and I place them far above any other 
religious or moral literature. But I cannot close my eyes to the | 
fact that many of my fellow-citizens think otherwise. They 
have the same rights that I have, and it would be un-American 
in me to force my views upon them.” (264) 


THE NEw ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EINHORN’S PRAYER- 
Book. Reform Advocate, 12:87, September 26, 1896. 
Welcomes the translation by Rabbi Emil G. Hirsch of “this 
incomparable prayer-book.’”’ Refers to his own review of the 
original in Sinai, October, 1858. Cf. No. 10, II. (265) 


1897 
*HISTORY OF KEHILLATH ANSHE MAARABH. By B. Felsen- 
thal and Herman Eliassof. Chicago: Kehillath Anshe 
Maarabh, 1897. 62 pp. 8vo. 
Issued on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the found- 
ing of the congregation. (266) 





ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 343 


ZUR BIBEL UND GRAMMATIK. In Semitic Studies in Memory 
of Alexander Kohut (Berlin, 1897), pp. 126-38. Con- 
tents: (1) Krmcut opER KAMcHI? pp. 126-33, 137-38. 
(2) ERKLARUNG VON AMOS, VI:10, pp. 133-37. 

Amplification of No. 250. Includes communications from 
A. Neubauer (Oxford), W. Bacher (Budapest), A. Berliner (Ber- 
lin), and D. A. Chwolson (St. Petersburg). 

Summarized by W. Bacher in Revue des études juives, 1897. 
35:127-28. (267) 


ZUR ERINNERUNG AN JACOB GRUNEBAUM. Illinois Staats- 
zettung, February 27, 1897: 
Brief biographical sketch on the occasion of his centenary. 
(268) 


THE SULZBERGERIANA AND ITS CATALOGUE. (Review of 
Or Mayer, compiled by Ephraim Deinard.) Jewish 
PC POnent 124 enO.) 222750 nos 2321) March’ 19-26, 1807. 

A review of the catalogue of Hebrew manuscripts and books 
owned by Judge Mayer Sulzberger of Philadelphia. There are 
remarks on the comparative value of Mss. of different periods. 

(269) 
THE ZIONIST CONFERENCE. American Hebrew, 61:18, May 
7, 1897. 

A letter to Rabbi H. P. Mendes. Discusses the importance of 
having representatives from America at the approaching con- 
ference at Munich. Gives briefly the reasons for his own strong 
convictions in favor of Zionism. ‘‘In America [the Russian Jews] 
are not wanted. Neither are the doors wide open for them in 
Australia, Germany, France, England, or elsewhere in Europe. 
Where then can the unfortunate people find a quiet and undis- 
turbed home ?” (270) 


An ASYLUM FOR OPPRESSED ISRAEL. Jewish Exponent, 
2500 at—-29) | UNEtA NI SO7. 

Favors colonization in Palestine as the best method of amelio- 

rating the condition of the Jews in Eastern Europe. Answers 

current objections to the movement, referring to the ‘“‘mission”’ 


344 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


idea, the signs of future restriction of immigration in this country, 
the unsatisfactory results of attempts to colonize in Argentina, 
a possible future Jewish state, etc. ‘I do not bother my mind 
with the question whether or not in a near or in a more distant 
future a Jewish state will be a possibility. For the present I, 
for my part, have no other object in view than that the Jews now 
living oppressed and persecuted be helped in reaching a better 


and higher level of living. . . . But suppose that in fifty or a 
hundred years there would be such a Jewish state,—would this 
be such an unfortunate turn of events?” (271) 


‘“PRISONERS OF WAR.” METHODS OF ANCIENT NATIONS. 
National Corporation Reporter, 15:43, September 9, 
1897. 

A reply, written on request of the editor, to the statement in 
Law Times (London), 103:380, August 21, 1897, that the history 
of the Jews shows a total absence of a sense of duty to other 
nations. Brings out the fact that the actual practice in Biblical 
times was much more humane than the stern laws commanded. 


(272) 


ZUR PALASTINAFRAGE. Illinois Staatszeitung, September 9g, 
1897. 

Zionism is discussed as a colonization project and as a philan- 
thropic measure for which there is the greatest necessity. Refers 
briefly to its political aspects: ‘‘The Jewish state will only be 
realized, if at all, in the distant future, and there is no need for 
us to concern ourselves overmuch with that now. But would 
such a state be indeed an unmixed evil? . . . For the five-sixths 
of the Jews who would remain in other lands, the existence of 
such a Jewish model state could only be a blessing.”’ (273) 


CHRONOGRAMS. Reform Advocate, 4:487-88, September 11, 
1897. 

On the building of Hebrew chronograms, with a few especially 
ingenious examples from Hebrew literature. Comments inci- 
dentally on the state of Jewish culture in Italy, as evidenced by a 
work published in 1860 in Trieste, containing one of the chrono- 
grams here reproduced. (274) 





ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 345 


[AN OPEN LETTER ON ZiontSM.| Chicago Israelite, October 
23, 1897. Same in American Israelite, 44, no. 18:4-5, 
October 28, 1897. Same in American Hebrew, 62: 201, 
December to, 1897. 


An answer to an article in the previous number, in which surprise 
had been expressed at B. F.’s Zionistic views. Maintains that 
colonization in Palestine is the only means of salvation for suffer- 
ing Jews in Eastern Europe. Touches on anti-Semitism, the 
so-called “mission of the Jews,” the possible future Jewish state, 
and the religious freedom which would there prevail. ' 

(275 


Ist PAUL HEYSE JUDISCHER ABSTAMMUNG? Illinois Staats- 
zeitung, December 2, 1897. 


In addition to facts in regard to Heyse’s Jewish origin on his 
mother’s side and the relations between Heyse and the Mendels- 
sohn-Bartholdy family, the article discusses the anti-Semitic 
agitation in Germany, particularly that one of its tenets accord- 
ing to which anyone who had a Jewish ancestor as far back as 
the fourth generation was not to be considered a German! 


(276) 


1898 


*THE BEGINNINGS OF THE CHICAGO SINAI CONGREGATION. 
A CONTRIBUTION TO THE INNER HISTORY OF AMERICAN 
Jupatism. Chicago: Executive Board of Chicago Sinai 
Congregation, 1898. 74 pp. 8vo. Includes reprint of 
Kol Kore Bamidbar (No. 11) on pp. 39-74. 


The history of the Jiidischer Reformverein, which later devel- 
oped into Sinai Congregation, is given in detail. Includes the 
following documents: (1) ‘‘Grundbestimmungen des jiidischen 
Reformvereins in Chicago” (“Fundamental principles of the 
Jewish Reform Society of Chicago”). (2) Preamble to constitu- 
tion of Sinai Congregation. (3) Extracts from the first con- 
stitution and by-laws. ‘The first of these documents was a series 
of theses submitted by B. F. It is the first complete statement 
of his views on Jewish Reform. Cf. No. 11. (277) 


346 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


REVIEW OF Semitic Studies. In Memory of Dr. Alexander 
Kohut. Edited by G. A. Kohut. American Journal of 
Semitic Languages and Literature, 14:134-36, January, 
1898. 

(278) 

ANTI-SEMITISM IN THE UNITED STATES. Reform Advocate, 
15:6, February 19, 1808. 

Contributed to a symposium. Sets forth the nature of anti- 
Semitism in this country, its underlying causes, and the attitude 
toward it which Jews should take. (279) 


AN ImporTANT ETHICAL PRINCIPLE. Reform Advocate, 
15:258, June 4, 1898. First published in “‘ Faz Leaflets,” 
a Literary Souvenir of the Jahrmarkt |held in| Dallas, Tex. 
[by Congregation Emanu-El|, April 13, 1898. 

The verse ‘‘Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself” is com- 
pared with “This is the book of the generations of man.” The 
second is considered to be ethically higher, because the word 
“neighbor”? (Hebrew, ré4) is, according to the Talmud, intended 
to refer to Israelites alone, while the word “‘man”’ includes every 
human being. (280) 


WHAT MEANING DID THE DOCTORS OF THE TALMUD ATTACH 
TO THE WorpD “R&A”? Reform Advocate, 15:306, 
June 25, 1808. 

Cf. No. 280. Brings forward additional evidence to prove that 
the word réé in the Bible was used in a restricted sense. (281) 


*FROM A LETTER BY Dr. B. FELSENTHAL, DATED AUGUST 2, 
1898. [Chicago: I.0.B.B., 1898.] 2 pp. 16mo. 

Brief remarks on the special duty of Jew toward Jew, and the 

influence for good exerted by the order of B’nai B’rith. (282) 


Jews Witt REMAIN HERE. Chicago Daily News, Novem- 
ber 9, 1808. 

Russian persecution is discussed as the background of the 

Zionist movement. An article for non-Jewish readers. (283) 


. 
ee ee 


—— 


ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 347 


1899 


CONCERNING JESUS, SURNAMED “THE Curist.” Ms. 1899. 
14 pp. (Included in this volume.) 

A statement of his views, written in response to a request . 

from a non-Jew. (284) 


As TO A JEWISH STATE. American Hebrew, 64:389-90, 
January 13, 1899. 

One of five articles under this heading. A forecast of the bene- 
fits which would be derived from a Jewish state for Jews and for 
humanity as a whole, with remarks on political Zionism as dis- 
tinguished from non-political. (285) 


THE JEW As POLITICIAN. Jewish Gazette, English Supple- 
ment, May 24, 1899. 

Contributed to a symposium. Emphatically opposes separate 

Jewish political organizations, such as ‘‘Hebrew Democratic”’ (or 

Republican) clubs. The question of Jewish racial separate- 

ness with its bearing on Zionism is also discussed. (286) 


EINE EDLE FRAU BEGRABEN. WURDIGUNG DES CHARAK- 
TERS FRAU EMILIE GREENEBAUM. Illinois Staatszeitung, 
September 30, 1899. 

Sketch of Mrs. Henry Greenebaum, an old and dear friend. 
(287) 

Is THERE A JEWISH QUESTION? In Souvenir Program, 
Young People’s Union, October 22, 1899 (Chicago, 1899), 
De. 

Contributed to a symposium. Gives the answer that there 
are many Jewish questions, and formulates the most important 


of these. Zionism, as a solution of the foremost one, is briefly 
discussed. (288) 


SOME REMARKS CONCERNING ZIonisM. H. U. C. Journal, 
4:48-53, December, 1899. 

A vigorous refutation of the arguments commonly made in 

opposition to Zionism. ‘‘ You, on the other side, are the dreamers, 

dreamers of dreams, because you expect that tomorrow, or in 


348 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


the next year, the sun of righteousness, the sun of liberty, equality 
and fraternity, will shine brightly everywhere upon earth, and 
that tomorrow, or at latest in the next year, the Aryan Jew-hater 
and Jew-baiter will embrace fraternally his Semitic brother, and 
that they together . . . Well, you are dreamers. And it is you 
who call the leading men of the Zionist movement, these practical 
men, these men of affairs, these unselfish enthusiasts and at the 
same time sober-minded and cool-headed workers, by the word 
dreamers? Verily, we live in a perverted world.” (289) 


1900 


[LETTER TO W. Scuur.| Ha-Tehiyyah, 1, no. 41:6, August 


[To 


3, 1900. 
In Hebrew. Relates to the Zionist Congress about to take 
place in London. (290) 


THE Epitror.| Ha-Tehiyyah, 1, no. 43:6, August 24, 
1900. 

In Hebrew. A letter to B. F. from Jacob Reifmann, containing 
notes to the Talmud and the Bible, is given in this and the two 
following numbers, with introduction by B. F. commenting on 
the value of Reifmann’s investigations and the scientific spirit 
displayed in his writings. (291) 


THE Epriror.| Ha-Tehiyyah, 1, no. 48:5, September 
21.1000: 

In Hebrew. A letter to Zionists, written as member of the 
Actions-Comité of the Zionist Congress. An appeal to the rank 
and file to do their part, by improving conditions in this country, 
and by supporting the organization financially. (292) 


JEwisH QueEsTIONS. H.U.C. Journal, 5: 23-28, October, 


TQOO. 

The questions formulated in No..288 are here treated more 
fully. The continued separate existence of the Jewish people, 
the retention of Jewish historical forms of worship, anti-Semitism, 
and the suffering of persecuted Jews in Eastern Europe are the 
problems discussed, Zionism being considered the solution of the 
last-named, ‘“‘the Jewish question.”’ (293) 





ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 340 
“IQOI | 
LIEBMANN ADLER. In Jewish Encyclopedia (New York, 
1901), vol. 1, pp. 196-97. 
(294) 
UEBER ANTISEMITISMUS UND VERWANDTES. Deborah, new 
Ser 1: 20741, Pebruary, 1901. 

On the lamentable condition of the Jews in Russia and Rou- 
mania, and the duty of American Israelites toward the perse- 
cuted members of their race. Discusses the nature of anti- 
Semitism, asserting that it is a manifestation of the inborn anti- 


pathy of men against those of different blood or different faith. 
Refers with great bitterness to Jewish anti-Semites. (295) 


SHALL FUNERAL SERVICES BE HELD IN THE HOME OR SYNA- 
GOGUE? American Hebrew, 69:105-6, June 14, I9gol. 

Contributed to a symposium. Opposes the holding of funeral 

services in the synagogue as a general rule. (296) 


JUDISCHE THESEN. Deborah, new ser., 1:260-63, 325-31, 
September—November, i901. Same, translated by 
Rudolph Grossman, with title, Jewish THESES, in 
Menorah Monthly, 31:367-72; 32:2-10, November, 
Igo1—January, 1902. Same, translated by Adele Szold, 
with title, FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF JUDAISM, in 
Maccabaean, 1:66-68, 108-11, November—December, 
tg0o1. (Reprinted: in translation in this volume, with 
title, ‘‘ Jewish Theses.’’) 

Berlin: H. Itzkowski, 1903. 18 pp. 8vo. Re- 
printed from Festschrift zum 70. Geburistage A. Ber- 
liner’s (Berlin, 1903), pp. 76-92. 

*FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF JUDAISM [first series only]. 
New York: Federation of American Zionists, 1918. 
ZDDa MONO: 

In the form of theses, with brief discussion, statements are 
made concerning the following: the distinction between Judaism 
and Jewish religion, Judaism a national and not a universal 
religion, the capacity of national religions for development, the 
racial distinctiveness of the Jews, the tendency of the time as to 





350 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


assimilation, and what will be the main problem within Judaism 
in the twentieth century. This, asserts B. F., is “whether Juda- 
ism shall continue to exist as a distinct race and a separate reli- 
gious fellowship, or whether it shall unite with other races and 
other religious fellowships and become amalgamated with them.” 
It is his opinion that “Jews will maintain their separate racial 
existence.”’ 

See remarks of Samuel Poznanski, Revue des études juives, 
THOS AAT MLA: 

Briefly reviewed in Zettschrift fiir Hebraeische Bibliographie, 
7:138. (297) 


[To THE Epitor.| Der taglicher Jiidischer Courier, December 
15, 190l. 

In German, with Hebrew characters. A greeting to the dele- 

gates to the Zionist Congress at Basle, with hopeful expressions 

regarding the future of the Jewish people. (298) 


1902 


A LAND OF REFUGE FOR THE JEWs. Camden (Ark.) Herald, 
February 6, 1902. Same in American Hebrew, 71:92, 
[piiareg ich ayeleyy. 

Brief article explaining the Zionist movement for non-Jewish 
readers. (299) 


SOME REMARKS CONCERNING THE TRANSLITERATION OF 
HEBREW WorpDs. Jewish Exponent, 34, no. 17:2, Feb- 
ruary 14, 1902. 

A few rules, with suggestions as to methods of instruction in 
Hebrew grammar in schools and colleges. (300) 


SHALL A SERMON HAVE A TEXT? Jewish Exponent, 34, no. 
20 5, MADE vale OO 
Distinguishes between lectures and sermons, and favors the 
selection of texts from Jewish literature—the Bible or later writ- 
ings. (301) 





ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 351 


JEWIsH “‘WELTANSCHAUUNG,” ISRAEL’S MISSION, AND KIN- 
DRED CONCEPTIONS. Reform Advocate, 24: 36-37, 58-61, 
September 6-13, 1902. Second part, with additions, 
under title, “ISRAEL’s MIssIon”; AN EXAMINATION 
OF AN OFTEN USED SONOROUS PHRASE, in Maccabaean, 
4:131-38, March, 1903. Same in Israel’s Messenger, 
Banow24>3-5,) March 8/1007; 

A vigorous assertion that the Jews of the present have no 
special message for the nations of the world, and that a scattered 
people can work less effectively for humanity than a united 
Israel having a political center. Maintains that the idea of the 
‘mission of Israel,’ as promulgated a half century previously 
by leaders of Reform, would very certainly, in consequence of 
Zionism, be revised by them today. (302) 


1903 

[ARE JEws A Race?] Union of American Hebrew Congrega- 
tions. Proceedings, December, 1903. 1904. 6:5047—49. 
In reply to a circular letter from Mr. Simon Wolf asking opin- 
ions as to the proper method of classification of Jewish immi- 
grants by federal authorities, it is here maintained that such 
immigrants are properly listed as Jews, the word being correctly 
used to designate race as well as religion. Shows, through illus- 
trations, the distinction between race and religion, and suggests 
the desirability of recording information on both of these points 
as well as on political status. _ (303) 


1QO04. 

THOUGHTS CONCERNING SOME JEWISH QUESTIONS OF THE 
Day. Central Conference of American Rabbis. Year- 
book, 1904. 14:193-201. Same in Views on the Synod 
(Baltimore, 1905), pp. 123-31. 

Read before the Central Conference of American Rabbis, 
Louisville, June 27, 1904. Emphatically opposes the establish- 
ment of a synod on the ground that such an institution would 
interfere with the religious freedom of the individual. (304) 


352 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


ARE THE JEWS A RACE OR RELIGION? Zion Messenger, 1, 
no. 3:3-5, October, 1904. Same in Jewish Tribune, 

4, no. 13:1, November 11, 1904. Same, with slight 
verbal changes, under title, ARE THE JEWS A RACE ORA 
DENOMINATION ? in Maccabaean, 8:240-42, June, 1905. 
Based on No. 303. ‘“‘The Jews constitute a race, and not 
merely a denominational community, and they are bound 
together more closely and unified more strongly by racial ties 
than by religious ties.” (305) 


CONCERNING THE READINGS FROM THE TORAH IN OUR 
SYNAGOGUES. Chicago Israelite, 51, no. 25:15, Decem- 
DEC OOA. 

Criticizes the practice of reading disconnected extracts, and 
urges a return to the custom of reading the Torah in its entirety 
in a triennial cycle. ‘To us our Bible is more than mere litera- 
ture, more even than sacred literature—it is Jewish National 
Literature. And every word of it is of significance to us.” 


(306) 
1905 
BRIEF AN HERRN Dr. KOHLER, VORSITZENDER DES COMITE, 
ETc. Central Conference of American Rabbis. Year- 
book, 1905. 15:107-I0. 
A minority report, containing further remarks on the synod 


question and defending the emphatic tone of his previous expres- 
sions on the subject. (307) 


Minority REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON SyNoD. In Views 
on the Synod (Baltimore, 1905), pp. 122-23. 

Signed by B. Felsenthal, Samuel Sale, and T. Schanfarber. 

Gives briefly the reasons for opposition to the synod and refers 

to the paper by B. F., “‘Thoughts Concerning Some Jewish 

Questions of the Day” (No. 304). (308) 


[To THE Epitors.] Ha-Leom, 4, no. 9, February 2, 1905. 
In Hebrew. Praises the journal Ha-Leom. Contains also 

some general remarks on the discouraging condition of Jewry 

and of Judaism in this country, and on the service to Israel of 

the Zionists of America. (309) 





ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 353 


CONCERNING THE MOVEMENT TO CREATE A SYNOD AND TO 
PROMULGATE A CREED WITHIN AMERICAN ISRAEL. 
Jewish Tribune, 5, no. 11:7, April 28, 1905. Extracts, 
with title, A SYNOD AND CREED FOR AMERICAN ISRAEL, 
in American Hebrew, 77:97-98, June 23, 1905. 

Supplementary to No. 304. An even more vigorous statement 
of the dangers inherent ina synod. “It is to be hoped that no 
Conference of Rabbis and no similar body will become guilty 
of destroying the oneness of Israel and of creating a schism by 
efforts to establish a synod and to formulate a creed. Beware! 
A Synod may enter—may enter? No, it wll enter as a forceful 
dividing wedge into American Israel, and inevitably it will lead 
toa schism. Beware!” (310) 


DIFFERENT OPINIONS. Zion Messenger, 2, no. 5:3-6, May, 
1905. Same in American Hebrew, 77:13-14, June 2, 
1905. 

On Zionism, considered in relation to the danger of total sub- 
mergence of the Jewish people, and to the ‘‘so-called mission”’ 
of Israel. ‘‘A small and well-organized nation is more efficacious 
for good in the world than many millions scattered and disor- 
ganized.” (311) 


1900 


[SuNDAY SERVICES.| Central Conference of American Rabbis. 
Yearbook, 1906. 16:107-8. 

An opinion included in the report of the chairman of the Com- 
mittee on the Influence of Sunday Services. Acknowledges the 
necessity for Sunday services in some congregations, but urges 
that, in these cases, the historical Sabbath be also observed. 

(312) 


1907 
[MotIOoNs SUBMITTED TO THE C.C.A.R.] Central Conference 
of American Rabbis. Yearbook, 1907. 17:31-34. 
Three resolutions bearing on Zionism, and one on Scripture 
reading in the synagogue. Touches on the “mission of Israel,” 
the question, Who is a Jew? and the relation of Zionism and 


354 ' BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Reform. Refutes the assertion that these two movements are 
opposites. ‘The history of the world did not stand still during 
the last sixty years which have elapsed since the rabbinical con- 


ferences in Braunschweig, Frankfurt, and Breslau. . . . Should 
then we, to speak in the language of the prophet, in behalf of 
those who are living, inquire of those who are dead ?”’ (313) 


DATE UNKNOWN 


EINE GERICHTSCENE IN BERLIN. Ms. 3 pp. 
Brief satirical sketch in dramatic form, bearing on anti- 
Semitism. (314) 


NocH A PAAR SCHNADERHUPFERLE, ZU ‘“‘FAUST, 3ER 
THEIL,’ EINZUSCHALTEN AUF 8.170. Ms. 8 pp. 

Parody of a scene in Faust, in which two of the characters, 

Pater Petraula and Vallisrosarum, represent B. F. and his friend 

Julius Rosenthal. (3759 


‘ 





INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Academies, Babylonian and Palestinian, 
259 

Adler, C., comp., Catalogue of the 
Hebrew Library of Joshua I. Cohen 
(Review), 215 

Adler, Liebmann, 240, 294 

Adler, Samuel, 237; Tenets of Faith and 
Their Authority in the Talmud 
(Review), 157 

Anti-Semitism, 189, 293, 295; in Ger- 
many, 197, 239, 276, 314; in the 
United States, 279. See also Perse- 
cution of Jews 

Aramaic language, 185, 195 

Assimilation, 160, 297 

Atonement, Day of, 254 

Auerbach, Berthold, 197; Briefe (Re- 
view), 197 


Bauer, B., Christus und die Cdsaren 
(Review), 103 

BEGINNINGS OF CHICAGO SINAI COoN- 
GREGATION, THE, 277 


Bible: Amos 6:10, 250, 267; and 
science, 10 (VI); criticism, 10 
(VII), 160; exegesis, 193; in 
public schools, 94, 264 

BIBLE INTERPRETATION; How AND 
How Not, 193 

Biblical history, teaching of, 59 (A), 
149, 227 


Bickell, G., Outlines of Hebrew Gram- 
mar (Review), 107 


Bikatha Dekephaja, pseud. of B.F., 36 


Bloch, J. S., Der Arbeiterstand bei den 
Paldstinensern, Griechen, und 
Rémern (Review), 180; Hellen- 
istische Bestandtheile im biblischen 
Schrifithum (Review), 178; Jean 
Bodin (Review), 162; Quellen und 
Parallelen zu Lessing’s ‘‘ Nathan” 
(Review), 144 

Blood accusation, 239 

B’nai B'rith, 33, 38, 42, 43, 65, 70, 71, 
79, 91, 139, 146, 255, 282 

Bodin, Jean, 162 


Book-reviewing in Jewish periodicals, 
135 

Book reviews. See Adler, C.; Adler, S.; 
Auerbach, B.; Bauer, B.; Bickell, 
Gy eBlochia | Wot Delnard: aise: 
Delitzsch, F.; Einhorn, D.; Ensel, 
G.S.; Felsenthal, B.; Friedlinder, 
M.; Fuenn, S. J.; Giidemann, M.; 
Hahn, A.; Hamburger, J.; Heil- 
prin, M.; Heller, S.; Hershon, P. I.; 
Kohn-Bistritz, M.; Kohut, A.; 
Kohut, G. A.; Krauskopf, J.; 
Landau, L. R.; Lazarus, E.; Leh- 
mann, E..; Loeb, I.; Luncz, A. M.; 
Mannheimer, M.; Mendes, F. De 
Sola; Mielziner, M.; Molchow, 
W.; Picciotto, J.; Rauchmann, L.; 


Rodkinson, M. L.; Riilf, J. J.; 
ochapira, = laces) ochorre sUyar bias 
Schreiber, E.; Sekles, S.; Smith, 


R. B.; Stein, L.; Studia Biblica; 
szold, B.; Teller, H. L.;° “‘Dheo- 
logus’’; Wise, I. M. 

Books, 135 

Breslau, Jiidisch-Theologisches Seminar, 
50 

Burial customs, 18 


Calendar, Jewish, 87 

Catechism for confirmation, 37 

Catholic church, relation to the Jews, 60 

Cemeteries, separate Jewish, 32 

Ceremonies, value of, 184 

Chaplains in U.S. Army, 21 

Charity, on applying for, 225 

Chauvinism, Jewish, 130 

Chicago: B’nai Sholom, 25; Jewish 
Educational Society, 104; Jews, 
history of, 134, 249; Jiidischer Re- 
formverein, 277; Kehillath Anshe 
Maarabh, 266; Moses Monte- 
flore Hebrew School, 220; Reform 
movement in, II, 277; Sinai 
Congregation, 198, 204, 277; Zion 
Congregation, 24 

Chicago fire: relief for Jewish sufferers, 
70; special collections, 69, 71 


395 


350 


Christianity, 29, 84, 228; discussion of, 
by Jews, 161, 172; origin of, 103 

Chronograms, Hebrew, 274 

Chronology, Jewish, 211 (IV—-VII) 

Circumcision, 112-116, 139, 233, 235. 
Sze also Proselytes 

Colonies, American, civil rights of Jews, 
188 

Colonization, Jewish, 236, 238, 244 

CONCERNING JESUS, SURNAMED “THE 
CHRIST,” 284 

Conversion: of Jews, 47; to Judaism, 46 

Cosmopolitanism, 137 

Creed. See Dogmas 

Cremation, 242 

Crémieux, Adolphe, 137 


Daly, C. P., correspondence with, 188 

Death, tree of, 209 

Deinard, E., comp., Or Mayer (Review) 
2 

Beas Franz, 161, 172; New Testa- 
ment (Hebrew translation) (Re- 
view), 173 

Dialectics, Talmudical, 153 

Dietary laws, 160 

Divorce, Jewish law of, 81, 82 

Dogma, Jewish, ro (III, IX), 112 

Dogmas in Judaism, 263 


Education, Jewish, 28, 30, 59 (A), 98, 
99, 102, 104 

Einhorn, D., Olath Tamid (Review), 
10 (II); tr. by E. G. Hirsch, 265 

Emigration, advice to European Jews, 
AI 

England, civil rights of Jews, 188. See 
also Jews in England 

English, immigrants advised to learn, 
220 

Ensel, G. S., Ancient Liturgical Music 
(Review), 169 

Ethical Culture, Society for, 123 

Ethics, instruction in, in public schools, 
94, 165-167 


Fassel, H., 61 


Faust, parody of, 315 


Felsenthal, B.; reminiscences of early 
life, 170; tr., Schafiner, A., Myrthen- 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


strauss und Gewitirzbeet, 210; 
JipIscHE FRAGEN (Reviews), 263: 
JiipiscHE THESEN (Reviews), 297; 
Kot Kore BAMIDBAR (Review), 
11; KRITIK DES CHRISTLICHEN 
MISSIONSWESENS (Reviews), 44; 
A PRACTICAL GRAMMAR OF THE 
HEBREW LANGUAGE (Reviews), 
39; SCHOFARKLANGE (Review), 
15; ZUR BIBEL UND GRAMMATIK 
(Summary), 267; ZUR PROSELYTEN- 
FRAGE IM JUDENTHUM (Reviews), 
I12 

Frankel, Zachariah, 92 

Freedom of the will, 24 

Friedlander, M., tr., Ueber die Philan- 
thropie des Mosaischen  Gesetzes 
(Philo) (Review), 145 

Fuenn, S. J., Ha-Ozar (Reviews), 211 (I), 
212 

FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF JUDAISM, 
207 

Funerals, 226, 296 


G., M., ‘“‘Franzésisch-jiidische Litera- 
tur,” 56 

Gebar Jehudai, pseud. of B. F., 30 

Geiger, Abraham, 75, 88, 89 

Germany: Jews in, 126; Reform in, 180 

Grist ES DOGMEN IM JUDENTHUM? 263 

GRAETZ, H., 49, 50 

Greenebaum, Mrs. Henry, 287 

Greensfelder, Mrs. Sarah, 23 

Griinebaum, Elias, 247 

Griinebaum, Jacob, 268 


Giidemann, M., Geschichte des Erzieh- 
ungswesen u. der Cultur der Juden 
in Frankreich und in Deutschland 
(Review), 148 


Ha-Leom, 309 

Hahn, A., Sepher Okere Harim. The 
Rabbinical Dialectics (Review), 153 

Hamburger, J., Realencyclopddie fiir 
Bibel und Talmud (Review), 152 


Haphtaroth, reading in synagogues, 
211 (XIV) 
Hebrew language: Germanisms in 


modern books, 120; grammar, 39, 
300; meaning of certain words, 78; 
phonology, 190; revival, 238; 
use of, in modern literature, 155 


INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY 


Hebrew literature, study of, 1 

HEBREW READER, 133 

Hebrew Union College, 186 

Heilprin, M., Bibelkritische 
(Review), 251 

Heller, S., and M. Kohn-Bistritz, Hin 
Bandchen Poesieen (Review), 171 

Hershon, P.I., A Talmudical Miscellany 
(Review), 156 

Heyse, Paul, 276 

Hirsch, Samuel, 221 

Historical research, 66 

History: Biblical, teaching of, 59 (A), 
149, 227; post-Biblical, teaching 
of, 149, 227, 246 

History of Jews, 34, 84, 111, 122, 125, 
126 

Hymn by B. F., 16 


Notizen 


Ibn Ezra, Abraham, LEpigrams, tr. 
Dy be e213 

Immigrants, advice to Jewish, 41, 223 

Incunabula, Hebrew, 181 

Intermarriage, 106, 138, 140, 146, 263 

Intermediate syllables, 190 


Jastrow, Marcus, discussion of views 
of, 36 

Jehovah (the name), 218 

Jesus, 161, 172, 284; as Messiah, 228 

Jewish question, 288, 293 

JEWISH THESES, 297 

Jewish Times, 48 


Jews: children of mixed marriages, 139; 
continuance as separate race, 293, 
297; contribution to civilization, 
73; history, see History of Jews; 
in England, 126; in Germany, 126; 
in Spain, 125; in the United States, 
90, 309; legal disabilities, 20; not 
the most religious people, 168. See 
also Race, Jewish 


Jews and European culture, 208 


Journalism, Jewish, 27, 58. See also 
Ha-Leom, Jewish Times, Jiidische 
Zeitschrift fiir Wissenschaft und 
Leben, Keren Or, Menorah Monthly, 
Zeitschrift fiir die Geschichte der 
Juden in Deutschland 


357 


Judaism, 29, 31, 34, 62, 97, 100, 101, 
183, 184, 214, 263, 207; age of, 
1o (III); compared with other 
religions, 168, 183; influence of, 62; 
modern, 136; science of, 164; study 
Of 210 a (1s) sh SUrVival soln i110; 
universal character of, 207 


JOUDISCHE FRAGEN, 263 
JoDISCHE THESEN, 297 


Jiidische Zeitschrift fiir Wissenschaft und 
Leben, 75 


JoéDISscHES SCHULWESEN IN AMERIKA, 
28 


Keren Or, 223 

Kimchi, ’Hayyim, 211 (XI) 

KIMCHI ODER KAMCHI, 250, 267 

Kleeberg, Minna, 124 

Know nothing party, 2 

Kohn-Bistritz, M., and S. Heller, Ein 
Béndchen Poesieen (Review), 171 

Kohut, A., ’"Arukh Completum (Review), 
241 

Kohut, G. A., ed., Semitic Studies 
(Review), 278 

Kot Kore BAMIDBAR, II, 277 

Krauskopf, J., Half a Century of Jud- 
aism in the U.S. (Review), 217 


KRITIK DES CHRISTLICHEN MISSIONS- 
WESENS, 44 


Landau, L. R., Die Reformation im 
Judenthum (Review), 162 


Law, Jewish, 81, 82, 108 


Lazarus, Emma, Songs of a Semite 
(Review), 178 


Lehinann, E., Gabriel Riesser (Review), 


158 
Lekhah Dodi, 219 
Liberty, German and Anglo-Saxon 


conceptions of, 216 

Libraries, Jewish, 1 

Library, Jewish, sale of, 40 

Lincoln, Abraham, 26 

Literature, Jewish, 185 

Loeb, I., Tables du calendrier juif 
(Review), 211 (IV-VII) 

Luncz, A. M., ed., Jerusalem. Jahr- 
buch (Review), 179 


358 


Madison, Indiana, reform in, 8 


Magnet, references to the, in Jewish 
literature, 14, 129 


Maharil, passage in Book of, 68 


Mannheimer, M., Das Gebetbuch u. der 
Religionsunterricht (Review), 162 


Marriage laws: Biblical, 53, 74; reform 
of, 59 (B), 61; uncle and niece, 175 


Mayer, Moritz, 35, 243 
Mekize Nirdamim, 211 (II), 245 
Mendelssohn, Moses, 249 


Mendes, F. De Sola, Concise Lexicon to 
the Talmuds, Targums, and Mid- 
rash works (Review), 142 

Menorah Monthly, 211 (X) 

Mesaref, 250, 267 

Mielziner, M., Introduction to the Tal- 
mud (Review), 253; The Jewish 
Law of Marriage and Divorce 
(Review), 196 

Mission of Israel, 100, ror, 302, 313 

Missions, Christian, 44, 45 

Mixed marriage. See Intermarriage 


Molchow, W., Ist der Pentateuch von 
Moses verfasst? (Review), 160 


Monotheism, discovery of, 31 
Montefiore, Moses, 192, 210 
Mosaic Law, authority of, ro (III) 
Mosaic laws, 10 (V, VIII) 

Music in the synagogue, 59 (C) 
Mysticism, Jewish, 219 


Nasi, David, 224 
Negroes, legal disabilities, 20 
Noda’ bi-Yehudah, 256 


Omer, 131 
ORIGIN OF JUDAISM AND ITS THREE 
Epocus, THE, 31 


Orthodoxy: and doctrine of revelation, 
7, 55; and Reform, to (I), 25, 52; 
future of, 54 


Pardo, David, 249 
Party politics, 177 


Persecution of Jews, 126, 239. See also 
Anti-Semitism 


Picciotto, J., Sketches of Anglo-Jewish 
History (Review), 96 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Ploni Almoni, pseud. of B. F., 218 

Polemics, religious, 172 

Political clubs, Jewish, 286 

Post-Biblical history, teaching of, 149, 
227, 246 

PRACTICAL GRAMMAR OF THE HEBREW 
LANGUAGE, 39 

Praying, facing east in, 17 

Prisoners, treatment of, 272 

Prohibition, 177. See also Total ab- 
stinence 

Prosbul, 81, 82, 187 

Proselytes, 51, 112, 117, 138, 203, 207, 
233, 235. See also Circumcision 

Puritans, 27 


Rabbi, non-authority of the, 203, 233 

RABBI PATRICK, 222 

Rabbinical Conference; Cleveland 
(1870), 63, 64, 217; Philadelphia 
(1869), 58, 59, 61, 217 

Race, Jewish, 51, 106, 109, 117, 127, 
128, 157, 229, 230, 293, 297, 303, 
3955353 

Ramah Lodge, Chicago, addresses 
before, 28, 31, 44, IOI, 102, FEO, 
182 


Rauchmann, L., Religidse Scheidewdnde 
(Review), 160 

Réé, meaning of, 280, 281 

Reform Judaism, 5, 7, 10-13, 24, 36, 


49, 55) 57, III, 203-4, 233; and 
Orthodoxy, 10 (I), 25, 52; move- 
ment in the United States, 8, 9, 
204, 277. See also Chicago, Re- 
form movement in 


Reifmann, Jacob, 291 

Release, law of, 187 

Religion, 110; in daily life, 262; of the 
future, 84; philosophy of, 150 

Religions, national, 297 

Revelation, doctrine of, 7, 55 

Riesser, Gabriel, 158, 163, 182 

Ritual, 5, 8, 293 

Rodkinson, M. L., New Edition of the 


Original Babylonian Talmud (Re- 
view), 257-60 


Rubel, Moses, 202 


INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY 


RULES PETS. 5) 4 Der 
(Review), 150 


Einheitsgedanke 


Saadyah Gaon, 231, 232 

Sabbath: Jewish, 248; legality of con- 
tracts made on, 108; legislation, 
177, 248 

Sabbath schools, 246 


Schaffner, A., Myrthenstrauss und Ge- 
wirzbeet, tr. by B. F., 210 


Schapira, H., tr., Mischnath Hammi- 
doth (Review), 147 


Schiller, 119, 154 
Schlemihl, history of name, 199 
SCHOFARKLANGE, 15 


Scholarship, 222; necessary to the rabbi, 
21r (XVII) 


Schorr, O. H., 54, 115, 211 (XV-XVI); 


He-’Haluz, XII (Review), 211 
(XV-XVI) 
Schreiber, E., Die Selbstkritik der 


Juden (Review), 143 

SCIENCE OF JUDAISM, THE, 164 

Sekles, S., Poetry of the Talmud (Re- 
view), I51I 

Self-improvement, 141 

Sermons, 301; delivered by B. F., 
15, 24, 25, 29, 62, 97, 262 

Servants, 262 

Shalom, Abraham, 208 

Shapira, M. W., forgery of, 83 

Shlof duz, 121 

Sinai Congregation. 
Congregation 

SITTLICHE UND RELIGIOSE LEBENSER- 
NEUERUNG, 24 

Slavery, Jews and, 19 


Smith, R. B., Mohammed and Moham- 
medanism (Review), 93 


Spain, Jews in, 125 

Special collections, 69, 71 

Spinoza, 105 

State legislature, B. F. a candidate for, 


See Chicago, Sinai 


177 
Stein, L., Gebetbuch fiir israelitische Ge- 
meinden (Review), 180; Der 


geklarte Judenspiegel (Review), 176 
Studia Biblica (Review), 200 
Sunday legislation, 177, 248 


359 


Sunday-Sabbath question, 57, 312 
Surinam, Jews in, 249, 261 
Synod question, 7, 159, 160, 186, 108, 


203, 207, 233, 234, 304, 307, 308, 
310 


Szold, B., Abodat Yisrael (Review), 72; 
The Book of Job with a New Com- 
mentary (Review), 206 


Talmud, 3, 10 (IV); authority of, 10 
(III-V) 


Tekufoth, 6 


Teller, H. L., tr., Die Juden (Lessing). 
In’s Hebriische iibersetzt (Review), 
T55 

Texts for sermons, 301 

Theological seminaries, 28, 30, 59 (A), 
80, 98, 99 

“Theologus,”’ Die jiidischen S peisege- 
setze (Review), 160 

Tolerance, 160 

Torah, reading in synagogues, 211 
(XIV), 306, 313; two-year cycle, 
air (VIII, XII, XIII) 

Total abstinence, 85, 86, 174, 194 

Transliteration, Hebrew, 300 


Typographical errors in Hebrew books, 
118 


Union of American Hebrew Congre- 
gations, 186 

Union of Reform congregations, 59 (D), 
80, 198 

United States: anti-Semitism in, 2709; 
idealism in, 252; Jews in, 90, 309; 
not a Christian state, 94, 95; 
Reform movement in, 8, 9, 204, 
277. See also Colonies, American 


UNSERE FREUDE BEI DER TEMPEL- 
WEIHE, 24 


WANDERING JEW, THE, 73 
WHERE Do WE STAND? 263 
WHEREFORE WE REJOICE, 24 


Wuy Do THE JEws Not Accept JESUS 
AS THEIR MESSIAH? 228 


Wine, use of, in the Bible, 85, 86, 174 

Wise, Isaac M., 186; Minhag America 
(Review), 63, 76-78 

Wo STEHEN WIR? 263 


360 


Yiddish language, 132, 220 


Zarza, Samuel, 66, 67 

Zeitschrift fiir die Geschichte der Juden in 
Deutschland, 211 (III) 

Zion Congregation. See Chicago, Zion 
Congregation 

Zion Literary Association, Chicago, 
addresses before, 109, 122, 125, 126, 
130, 141, 154, 103, 183, 184, 189 


BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Zionism, 270, 271, 273, 275, 283, 285, 
286, 288, 289, 293, 299, 302, 311, 
313. See also Colonization, Jewish 

Zionist Congress, first (1897), 270; 
fourth (1900), 290; fifth ( 
298 

Zionists in America, 292 

Zunz, Leopold, 191 

ZUR PROSELYTENFRAGE IM JUDENTHUM, 
112 


1901), ‘ 





INDEX TO BIBLIOGRAPHY, ARRANGED BY 
PERIODICALS, ETC. 


UNPUBLISHED MANUSCRIPTS 


E28155°30)"S4, 1100-103, 100, 110; 122, 
9255,1 20,130,141, 0154, 103, 1081170, 


182-85, 284, 314, 315 


SEPARATE PUBLICATIONS 
(PAMPHLETS, BOOKS, REPRINTS) 


II, 15, 22-24, 28, 37, 39, 44, 73, 112, 133, 
£0050 220, 0240," 240,1 201," 203,) 200, 1277, 


282, 207 


INCLUDED IN OTHER WORKS 


16, 33, 59, 62, 73, 89, 98, 111, 134, 139, 
EOOm2LO,8221,0225,)240,1.248,. 202.0207, 


277, 280, 288, 294, 297, 304, 308 


ARTICLES IN PERIODICALS AND OTHER SERIAL PUBLICATIONS 


Albany (New York) Law Journal, 81, 
82, 95 

American Hebrew (New York), 175, 188, 
226, 279, 275, 285, 296, 299, 3109, 
cour 

American Israelite (Cincinnati), 259, 275 

American Jewish Historical Society. 
Publications (Baltimore), 249, 261 

American Journal of Semitic Languages 
and Literature (Chicago), 278 

Camden (Ark.) Herald, 299 

Central Conference of American Rabbis. 
Yearbook (Cincinnati), 233, 242, 
263, 304, 307, 312, 313 

Chicago Daily News, 283 

Chicago Evening Journal, 45 

Chicago Inter-Ocean, 189, 243 

Chicago Israelite, 259, 275, 300 

Chicago Legal News, 175 

Chicago Republican, 29 

Chicago Sonntags-Zeitung, 31 

Chicago Telegraph, 24, 25 

Chicago Times, 91, 94, 165 

Chicago Tribune, 46, 47, 85, 86, 90, 94, 
165, 177, 264 

Christian Freeman (Hillsdale, Mich.?), 34 

Deborah (Cincinnati), 4, 8, 140, 192, 
202, 207, 250, 252, 295, 207 

Ha-Ibri (New York), 245 


361 


Ha-Leom (New York), 309 

Ha-Maggid (Lyck, East Prussia), 41 

Ha-Pisgah (Baltimore and _ various 
places), 238 

Ha-Tehiyyah (Chicago), 290-92 


Ha-Zofe-be-Erez-ha-Hadashah (New 
York), 67 

Hebraica (Chicago), 190, 195, 206, 212, 
241 


Hebrew Leader (New York), 30, 32, 35, 
36, 42, 68 

Hebrew Review (Cincinnati), 149, 164 

Hebrew Student (Chicago), 173, 181 

Hebrew Union College Journal (Cin- 
cinnati), 289, 293 

Illinois Staatszeitung (Chicago), Intro- 
ductory Note, 13, 19-21, 26, 43, 
GonS3) Sos 025 2100,715 7.41325 100. 
IQI, 208, 237, 239, 247, 208, 273, 
2705257 

Israelite (Cincinnati), 1, 3, 5, 6 

Israelitische Presse (Chicago), 113, 121, 
129, 131 

Israel’s Messenger (Shanghai), 302 

Jewish Advance (Chicago), 117, 120, 123, 
124, 127, 128, 130, 137, 139, 146- 
48, 157, 159 

Jewish Exponent (Philadelphia), 215, 
234, 235, 269, 271, 300, 301 

Jewish Gazette (New York), 286 


362 BERNHARD FELSENTHAL 


Jewish Herald (New York), tor 

Jewish Messenger (New York), 116, 118, 
188, 203, 229 

Jewish Reformer (New York), 198-201, 
204 

Jewish Times (New York), 47-58, 
61-66, 69-80, 85, 86, 88, 90, 91, 
94, 95, 97-99 

Jewish Tribune (Portland, Ore.), 305,310 

eee ame (St. Louis), 231-33, 244, 
25 

Jiidischer Courier (Chicago), 220, 225 

Keren Or (Chicago), 223, 224 

Lawrenceburg (Ind.) Democratic Regis- 
ler, 2 

Libanon. Beiblatt zu ‘Young Israel” 
(New York), 104, 106, 110 

Maccabaean (Chicago), 174 

Maccabaean (New York), 297, 302, 305 

Menorah Monthly (New York), 211, 
213,421 Asa2t 5.) 2108222. 1227 20) 
231, 233, 243, 248, 207 

Monitor, Dist. No. 6, I.0.B.B. (Chi- 
cago), 255 

Nation (New York), 40, 83, 93, 96, 107, 
I51, 156, 167, 209 


National Corporation Reporter (Chi- 
cago), 272 

New Year, The (Chicago), 216 

New Yorker Staatszeitung, 237 

Occident (Chicago), 186, 205, 217 

Old Testament Student (Chicago), 187, 
193, 194, 196 

Progress (New York), 27 

Reform Advocate (Chicago), 228, 236, 
240, 248, 251, 253, 254, 257, 258, 
260, 265, 274, 279-81, 302 

Reformer and Jewish Times (New 
York), 108, 114, 115, 130 

Sinai (Baltimore), 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 17, 
1G;:2n 

Téglicher Jiidischer Courier (Chicago), 
298 

Union of American Hebrew Congrega- 
tions. Proceedings (Baltimore), 303 

Westen, Der (Chicago), 105, 192, 197 

Young Israel (New York), 87 

Zeitgeist (Milwaukee), 135, 138, 142-45, 
148, 150, 152, 153, 155, 158-62, 
104, 100; 171-735°1 70, 1 Tosco 

Zion Messenger (Chicago), 305, 311 


PRINTED IN THE U-S.A. 





Bs ¥ 


iii 
1 1012 01195 1557 





ae ~ 
le ae ga = 


gn ge 


owe 


a 


- 
a 


es 


te see 


4 ha | ] : 
pe 


ea 
eit 
is 


. i 4 
aime GAT? i) “nh 


We 
— vay 
tah MiALD kt 


; aes f 
no ahe 
cy av, 


‘i 


*; ad 


ves Pian 
Ms ee 
vy 


i det 
Area 


Te Bh 


F 


i 
ij ay 
iy \ 
Phin 


4 s ye oe LS 
’ Vy , Nd | 
ee Oa, MeN E | 
4 


VA A 


Ried ‘t @ 
rs Cae 
} ed 


- a 
Noa TS 


AA? 
ws) 


he Go 


oy ; 


, iy ae ; nh nee 


) 





ee aeecnretnd 1 Wives blindness ironed abet strats haeetens aes awe beat Me nwt atier ven -nais= pati ns Ong tt aelnesti ts aoc Shean Ag oa oe ne ee eee eS ee Le eT ee © 
a ee. oor le, 
- . was 





. a “ gi 








Se NE Alay 





x 
SENS 





smear TFS 
<hr! 

ees 

at 





pean? 


Sian 

















Sater 





vote af 
35S ee 





eae 














ROA 


2 ee ete 


